sympy_Nand

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

With no annotations, the description alone must disclose behavior. It only states 'Logical NAND', omitting key details like output type, evaluation order, or handling of multiple expressions. The agent cannot infer if it returns a boolean or symbolic result.

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 extremely concise (two words) but lacks essential information. While front-loaded, it sacrifices completeness for brevity. Every phrase earns its place, but the overall length is insufficient.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown) and the complexity of logical operations, the description fails to explain the return value or behavior with multiple expressions. It is incomplete for safe and 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?

The input schema describes the single parameter 'args' as 'Comma-separated expressions' with 100% coverage. The description adds no further semantic context, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 'Logical NAND' clearly indicates the tool performs a logical NAND operation, which is a standard boolean function. It distinguishes from siblings like sympy_And and sympy_Not by name, but lacks a verb+resource structure and does not specify scope or inputs.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like sympy_And or sympy_Nor. The description does not mention context, prerequisites, or exclusions, making it difficult for an agent to choose correctly.

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