calculate_paper_size_convert

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It describes a read operation returning dimensions, which is sufficient for a simple lookup tool. However, no additional behavioral details (e.g., error handling, precision) are given.

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?

The description is three sentences and generally clear, but the second sentence 'Use for printing' is unnecessary and vague. It could be more concise without losing meaning.

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?

Although there is an output schema (not shown), the description mentions returning mm and inches. However, the format list mismatch and lack of error handling leave gaps. For a simple tool, it is nearly complete but the inconsistency reduces completeness.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with an enum and description. The description adds 'format name' but does not add value beyond the schema. Moreover, the description lists formats not in the enum, causing confusion.

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 gets dimensions of paper formats, but it lists formats (A0-A10, B0-B10) that are not fully present in the input schema's enum (only A0-A5, Letter, Legal, Tabloid). This mismatch undermines purpose clarity.

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 says 'Use for printing' but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The mention of 'list_bundles' is vague and doesn't help the agent decide.

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