solve_ode

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool returns a general solution with arbitrary constants, but omits session requirements, side effects, limitations (e.g., nonlinear ODEs), or error behavior. This is insufficient for a tool in a session-based environment.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action and outcome, and includes a minimal preference note. Every sentence earns its place, with no redundant or filler content.

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 schema and output schema cover parameter details and return shape, but the description does not mention important context like session prerequisites or limitations. It conveys the core purpose and a selection hint, but leaves gaps that could mislead an agent in complex usage scenarios.

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 100% description coverage for all four parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides; it only mentions the output type, not the meaning of parameters.

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 action ('Solve an ordinary differential equation of any order') and the outcome ('returning the general solution with arbitrary constants'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like solve_equation or evaluate_sage, and the explicit preference note reinforces its purpose.

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 direct guidance with 'Prefer this over evaluate_sage', naming an alternative to use instead. However, it does not mention when not to use this tool or discuss other alternatives like solve_equation for algebraic equations, so it lacks full exclusionary guidance.

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