multiply

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

There are no annotations to supplement the description, so the full burden falls on the text. It does not disclose return type, error behavior, or any side effects, leaving the agent to assume the operation is pure and returns a numeric result.

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 a single, focused sentence with no extraneous information. It is highly concise and directly conveys the operation.

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 the simplicity of the tool and the presence of an output schema, the description is adequate for an agent to understand the operation. It could mention the result type, but the schema likely covers that, so nothing critical is missing.

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 mentions 'two numbers' which maps directly to the parameters a and b, but it does not elaborate beyond that. The schema defines them as integers, and the description adds minimal semantic value.

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 action ('multiply') and the resource ('two numbers'), leaving no ambiguity about the tool's purpose. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tools add and subtract by specifying the multiplication operation.

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 directly implies the use case (performing multiplication), but it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives like add or subtract. The usage is inferred from the verb, but no conditional guidance is provided.

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