thai_baht_to_text

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds the return format (JSON with amount and text), which is not in annotations. However, edge cases like zero, satang, or large numbers are not mentioned.

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?

Three sentences with no redundancy. Purpose, use cases, and return format are presented in a front-loaded manner. Every sentence adds value.

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?

For a simple conversion tool, the description covers purpose and output. It doesn't mention handling of satang or limit of input range, but given the output schema exists, this is acceptable. Slightly missing details on parameter behavior.

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 description coverage is 0% meaning the description adds no param info. The schema itself has a description for 'amount', but the tool description does not explain the parameter further, violating the expectation to compensate for low coverage.

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: 'Convert a baht amount to its Thai reading' with an example, and the resource is well-defined. It distinguishes from sibling tools which focus on other Thai-related conversions.

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 use cases ('invoices, receipts, and cheques') but does not explicitly say when not to use it or suggest alternatives. This provides context but lacks exclusion criteria.

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