calculate_pythagoras

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only mentions 'Returns: {error}' without explaining error conditions or behavioral details such as the need for exactly two of the three inputs. This leaves the agent uninformed about important constraints.

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 very short (two sentences), which is concise, but the structure is awkward: the first sentence states purpose, and the second mixes an error mention with a cross-reference. A clearer structure would improve readability.

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?

Despite having an output schema (not shown), the description omits critical usage details, such as the fact that exactly two of the three sides must be provided and how errors are communicated. For a mathematical calculator, this is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 basic descriptions ('Side a length', etc.), but the schema and description together fail to clarify that exactly two parameters are required. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema.

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's purpose: 'Find missing side of right triangle using Pythagorean theorem.' The verb 'Find' and resource 'missing side of right triangle' are specific, and the tool is distinct among many sibling calculators.

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 mentions 'See list_bundles for related math calculators', providing a hint to find alternatives, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus others or give usage context like requiring exactly two inputs.

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