speed_conversion

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. The description only states what the tool does at a high level without revealing any behavioral traits: it doesn't mention what units are supported, whether conversion is bidirectional, precision considerations, error handling for invalid units, or what the output format looks like. This leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves.

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 at just one sentence ('在不同速度单位之间进行转换'). It's front-loaded with the core purpose and contains no unnecessary words or redundant information. Every word earns its place in conveying the essential function.

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 has 3 parameters with 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is completely inadequate. For a conversion tool, users need to know what units are supported, the format of input/output, and any constraints. The current description provides none of this essential context, making it insufficient for effective tool use.

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 none of the three parameters (value, from_unit, to_unit) have descriptions in the schema. The tool description provides no information about these parameters beyond what's implied by the tool name. It doesn't explain what units are acceptable, whether they should be abbreviations or full names, or provide examples of valid unit values.

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 '在不同速度单位之间进行转换' clearly states the tool's purpose as converting between speed units. It specifies the verb '转换' (convert) and the resource '速度单位' (speed units), making the function unambiguous. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling conversion tools like 'length_conversion' or 'temperature_conversion' beyond mentioning speed specifically.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are multiple sibling conversion tools (area_conversion, length_conversion, temperature_conversion, time_conversion, volume_conversion, weight_conversion), but the description doesn't indicate when speed conversion is appropriate versus other unit conversions or mathematical operations. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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