calculate_motor_torque

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the formula, units (N·m, lb-ft), and suggests a pure calculation. It does not contradict annotations (none exist). Could mention no side effects, but fine.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three sentences, no fluff, front-loads the purpose and formula. Every sentence adds value.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool is simple and output schema exists, but the unit discrepancy (kW vs watts) is a major gap that makes the description incomplete. Otherwise adequate.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description states 'Inputs: power kW' but the schema parameter is 'power_w' with description 'Power watts', creating a critical unit mismatch. This confuses the agent, and the formula uses kW while the parameter expects watts. Schema coverage is 100%, but the description undermines it.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool computes motor torque from power and RPM, provides the exact formula, and specifies the domain 'mechanical sizing'. It is specific and distinguishable from the many sibling calculator tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives clear context ('Use for mechanical sizing') and points to a related tool group via 'See list_bundles for related "science" calculators'. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use or exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.