Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-sympy

mcp-sympy

by daedalus
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

sympy_Point

Construct a 2D point with symbolic x and y coordinates for use in geometric computations.

Instructions

Create a 2D point.

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": {
      "x": "<x>",
      "y": "<y>"
    },
    "name": "sympy_Point"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
xYesx-coordinate
yYesy-coordinate

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only says 'Create a 2D point' but does not disclose behavioral traits such as return type, side effects, or coordinate validation. The output schema existence partially mitigates, but transparency remains low.

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?

One sentence, no wasted words. Perfectly concise for its purpose.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, full schema coverage, and existence of output schema, the description is mostly complete. It lacks explicit mention of creating a sympy Point object but is still adequate for basic understanding.

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 description coverage is 100%, with x and y described as 'x-coordinate' and 'y-coordinate'. The description adds no extra meaning, so baseline score of 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 explicitly states 'Create a 2D point,' specifying the verb 'Create' and the resource '2D point,' and it distinguishes itself from the sibling sympy_Point3D by adding '2D'.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like sympy_Point3D. The description lacks context for when it is appropriate or inappropriate to use this tool.

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