matrix_multiply

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of disclosing side effects and edge cases. It does state the output format ('result as nested lists'), which is helpful, but it does not mention dimension mismatch behavior, symbolic entry support, or whether session state is read or modified.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the core action and result format without wasted words. It is concise and well-structured.

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?

The input schema and output schema handle parameter and return details, and the description covers the primary purpose. However, it is incomplete regarding error conditions, the role of the 'session' parameter, and any stateful behavior, which leaves some context missing.

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 already provides detailed descriptions for both matrix parameters, including the note about integers and decimal strings. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline score of 3 applies given the high schema coverage.

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 states a specific verb ('Multiply') and resource ('two matrices') and clearly defines the output as 'nested lists'. This unambiguously distinguishes matrix_multiply from broader sibling tools like matrix_operation.

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 given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as matrix_operation or calculate_expression. The description only states what the tool does, not the context or exclusions.

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