SymKit

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

show_assumptions

Retrieve all symbolic assumptions currently active in the mathematical context. Use this to inspect constraints and conditions for symbolic computations.

Instructions

    Show all symbolic assumptions in the current scope

    Returns:
        Assumptions in the current MathContext

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "show_assumptions"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 8, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description fails to disclose behavioral details such as what constitutes 'current scope', whether the tool has side effects, or the format of the returned assumptions. The description is minimal and leaves significant uncertainty.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is short with two sentences and no unnecessary words. However, the inclusion of a Returns section that mostly restates the first sentence is mildly redundant, preventing a perfect score.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool has no parameters, an output schema, and is relatively simple, the description is adequate but not thorough. It does not explain key concepts like 'current scope' or assumption representation, leaving some context for agent decision-making.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100% (no params). The description adds value by stating the return object (assumptions in current MathContext), which goes beyond the empty schema. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description meets this baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb 'Show' and resource 'symbolic assumptions' with scope 'current scope'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'assume' (adds assumptions) and 'list_assumptions' (different listing context).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'list_assumptions' or how assumptions are managed. The description does not provide context for appropriate invocation.

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