nth_prime

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 'efficient prime generation,' which hints at performance but lacks details on computational limits, error handling, or output format. The domain and category tags ('arithmetic, number_theory') add some context but are not behavioral traits. More specifics on constraints or behavior would improve transparency.

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 highly concise and front-loaded: the first sentence states the core purpose, followed by efficiency note and domain tags. Every sentence adds value without redundancy. It efficiently communicates essential information in a compact form.

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 complexity (mathematical computation with one parameter), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is moderately complete. It covers purpose and indexing but lacks details on performance, error cases, or return values. For a tool without structured output documentation, more behavioral context would enhance completeness.

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 1 parameter with 0% description coverage. The description adds meaning by specifying 'n' as '1-indexed,' clarifying the indexing semantics beyond the schema's type. However, it does not detail valid ranges (e.g., positive integers) or potential limitations (e.g., large n values). With low schema coverage, this partially compensates but is insufficient for full clarity.

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's purpose: 'Find the nth prime number (1-indexed).' It specifies the verb ('Find') and resource ('nth prime number'), and clarifies indexing. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'first_n_primes' or 'next_prime', which are related but distinct operations.

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. It mentions 'efficient prime generation' but does not specify contexts or prerequisites, nor does it refer to sibling tools like 'first_n_primes' for listing primes or 'is_prime' for primality testing. Usage is implied but not explicitly stated.

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