symbolic_sum

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention what happens when no closed form exists, that the tool uses a named session/workspace, or whether the operation is read-only. These are important behavioral traits that are left unaddressed.

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 long, with the first sentence front-loading the core purpose and the second providing a direct usage cue. Every word earns its place; no filler or redundancy.

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 operation is well-defined by the description, and the output schema plus full parameter descriptions fill in most details. However, the description omits edge-case behavior like failure modes and the session mechanism, which would make it more complete.

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 provides full descriptions for all six parameters (100% coverage). The tool description adds no extra parameter details beyond what the schema already includes, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 what the tool does: computes the closed form of a symbolic sum or product over an index variable, including infinite series. This is specific and distinguishes it from siblings by noting a preference over evaluate_sage for summations.

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?

It explicitly says 'Prefer this over evaluate_sage for summations,' providing an alternative and a condition for when to use this tool. The description also clarifies the scope (sums, products, infinite series), giving clear usage context.

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