Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-parigp

mcp-parigp

by daedalus
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

polhermite

Compute the nth Hermite polynomial (probabilists' version) with an optional variable name for symbolic output.

Instructions

Compute the nth Hermite polynomial (probabilists' version).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "n": "<n>"
    },
    "name": "polhermite"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nYesNon-negative integer.
vNoVariable name (default 'x').x

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions the 'probabilists' version' variant but does not disclose any side effects, required permissions, error conditions, or output format. Minimal behavioral context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single sentence that immediately communicates the tool's purpose with no unnecessary words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple mathematical function with two parameters and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It could mention valid range for n or output type, but for a niche tool it suffices.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%; both parameters are described in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool computes the nth Hermite polynomial (probabilists' version), which is a specific mathematical function. It distinguishes from sibling polynomial tools like polchebyshev and pollegendre.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for Hermite polynomials but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like polchebyshev or pollegendre. Users must infer from the function name.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools