calculate_wavelength_frequency

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it also returns photon energy E=hf, which is additional behavioral detail. However, it does not clarify what happens if both parameters are provided or if none are provided, leaving ambiguity since the schema indicates both are optional.

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 extremely concise with two sentences. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose, and the second provides an extra output and a pointer to related tools. No unnecessary words.

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?

Given that an output schema exists, the description does not need to detail return values. It covers the essential behavior: solving c=λ·f for EM waves and returning photon energy. It is complete for a simple calculator tool, though it could mention unit constraints more explicitly.

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% description coverage, already explaining that wavelength_m is in meters and frequency_hz is in Hz. The description adds no new meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 3 applies.

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 it solves c=λ·f for EM waves and returns photon energy. It specifies the verb 'solve' and the resource 'EM waves'. However, it does not distinguish itself from sibling tools like 'calculate_wave_properties' or 'calculate_energy_physics', which could overlap in functionality.

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 implies usage by saying 'Provide wavelength or frequency' and suggests seeing list_bundles for related calculators, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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