harmonic_number

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the calculation but does not disclose behavioral traits such as input validation (e.g., n must be positive), performance characteristics, error handling, or output format. This leaves gaps in understanding how the tool behaves beyond the basic formula.

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 front-loaded with the core formula in one clear sentence, followed by domain/category tags. It is appropriately sized with no redundant information, though the tags could be integrated more seamlessly. Every sentence earns its place by defining the tool's purpose.

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 low complexity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is adequate but incomplete. It defines the calculation but lacks details on input validation, output type, and error conditions. For a mathematical tool, this is minimally viable but leaves room for improvement in guiding usage.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not add any parameter-specific information beyond the formula's use of 'n'. It implies 'n' is an integer in the harmonic sum but does not explain constraints (e.g., n > 0) or semantics. With one parameter and no schema descriptions, the baseline is 3 as it minimally covers the parameter's role.

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 explicitly states the mathematical operation: 'Calculate the nth harmonic number H_n = 1 + 1/2 + 1/3 + ... + 1/n.' It provides the specific formula and distinguishes this tool from siblings by specifying the domain (arithmetic) and category (harmonic_series), making its purpose unambiguous.

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 includes domain and category tags, which imply usage in arithmetic and harmonic series contexts, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'harmonic_series' or 'harmonic_partial_sum' from the sibling list. No guidance on prerequisites, limitations, or specific scenarios is provided.

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