Perform precise division calculations by entering a numerator and denominator. The tool outputs the result accurately, aiding in mathematical problem-solving tasks.
Divides the first number by the second number
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| denominator | Yes | The number to divide by (denominator) | |
| numerator | Yes | The number being divided (numerator) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a straightforward arithmetic division but does not disclose behavior for zero denominator, precision, or error handling, which are important for a math 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 a single short sentence that immediately conveys the action. It is concise and focuses on the core functionality, though it could optionally discuss edge cases.
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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is partially complete but lacks discussion of division by zero and return value. Given the many sibling math tools, more context would improve differentiation.
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 100%, with both parameters already described. The description adds no extra semantic meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 operation 'divides the first number by the second number', specifying the verb and the two resources. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like add, multiply, or modulo.
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 division versus alternatives, no mention of edge cases like division by zero, and no comparison with related operations such as modulo.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.