np_exp

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

The description accurately conveys that it operates element-wise, but lacks details about return type (output schema exists but not described), potential overflow, or dtype handling. Without annotations, the description carries full burden and provides adequate transparency for a simple math function.

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?

Single sentence, 9 words, front-loaded with the action. No unnecessary 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?

For a simple element-wise exponential function with one parameter and an output schema, the description is largely complete. It could mention that it returns a new array of the same shape, but the current phrasing implies that. Lacks mention of edge cases like complex numbers or negative exponents, but still adequate.

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 coverage is 100%, so the parameter 'array' is already described. The description adds no new semantic information about the parameter beyond the schema's 'The input array.' Baseline 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 the action ('calculate exponential') and the resource ('all elements in the array'), distinguishing it from sibling mathematical functions like np_log or np_sqrt.

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 on when to use np_exp versus alternatives (e.g., np_power, np_log). The description only explains what it does, not when it is appropriate.

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