symexp

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action without explaining side effects, required permissions, or behavior (e.g., whether it modifies existing objects or creates new ones).

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 very short, achieving conciseness but at the cost of utility. While it does not waste words, it fails to provide sufficient information to make it earn its place.

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 has 4 parameters, 2 required, no schema descriptions, and no annotations, the minimal description is completely inadequate. An output schema exists but is not leveraged in the description. The tool likely requires more context for correct invocation.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides no information about the four parameters (segi, cutoff, prefix, selection), leaving their purpose and expected values completely unspecified.

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 succinctly states it generates symmetry-related copies, which is a clear verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like set_symmetry and symmetry by focusing on 'copies', but lacks detail to differentiate fully.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description fails to mention any context or prerequisites, leaving the agent with no usage direction.

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