matinv

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only says 'Compute the inverse of a matrix,' omitting critical details like what happens for non-invertible matrices, return format, side effects, or runtime characteristics.

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 with no extra words. It is concise but lacks necessary contextual details, making it slightly less effective.

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 lack of output schema and no behavioral details, the description is insufficient. For a mathematical operation like matrix inversion, details about error handling, matrix properties, and output structure are 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 has one parameter 'm' described as 'Invertible square matrix.' The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3.

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 'Compute the inverse of a matrix,' which is a specific verb ('compute') and resource ('inverse of a matrix'). This distinguishes it from sibling matrix tools like matdet, mateigen, matker, etc.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, no prerequisites (e.g., matrix must be square and invertible), and no exclusions. No explicit context is given.

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