aks_primality_test

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

No annotations are provided, and the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits. It doesn't mention computational complexity, input constraints (e.g., range of n), error handling, or output format. For a tool with no annotations, this leaves the agent with insufficient information about 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—a single sentence that directly states the tool's purpose and algorithm type. It's front-loaded with the essential information and wastes no words, making it efficient for quick understanding.

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 complexity of a primality test algorithm, no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It lacks details on parameters, behavior, output, and usage context, making it inadequate for an agent to effectively use the tool.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, and the tool description provides no information about the parameter 'n'. It doesn't explain what 'n' represents (e.g., integer to test), valid ranges, or constraints. With one undocumented parameter, the description fails to compensate for the lack of schema details.

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 performs the AKS primality test, which is a specific algorithm for determining if a number is prime. It distinguishes itself from simpler primality tests like 'is_prime' or 'miller_rabin_test' by mentioning it's deterministic and polynomial-time, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'is_prime', 'miller_rabin_test', or 'deterministic_miller_rabin'. The description only states what the algorithm is, not its practical application or trade-offs compared to other primality tests available.

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