convert_dose_units

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

The 'agent contract' part adds behavioral instructions about handling the response (use structuredContent, preserve fields), but no annotations are provided. The description does not disclose side effects, error behavior, or whether it is read-only, which is partially expected for a conversion tool.

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 short (two sentences) and front-loads the purpose. The inclusion of the agent contract adds relevant but non-essential information; however, it is still concise without wasted 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 the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the basics. However, it lacks mention of error cases (e.g., incompatible units) and does not elaborate on how the conversion is performed, leaving some gaps.

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?

Schema coverage is only 40%, with descriptions only for 'locale' and 'output_format'. The description does not explain the key parameters (value, from_unit, to_unit) beyond their names, leaving ambiguity about accepted values and behavior.

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 function: 'Convert between dose units (g, mg, mcg, ng).' It specifies the exact units and differentiates it from sibling tools like dose calculations by focusing solely on unit conversion.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Despite a clear purpose, the description does not specify that it is for simple unit conversion only, nor does it mention when not to use it (e.g., for dose calculations).

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