sympy_diag

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

No annotations provided; the description omits behavioral traits such as matrix dimensions (likely inferred from element count), error conditions, or handling of non-numeric input. Minimal disclosure beyond the basic operation.

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 with efficient, front-loaded content. No redundant words, earning its place as a concise description.

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 single parameter and output schema existence, the description is adequate but lacks explicit mention of matrix size behavior (e.g., square matrix of order len(elements)). Leaves minor gaps that could be filled.

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 schema already describes 'elements' as 'Comma-separated diagonal elements', covering 100% of the parameter. The description adds no further meaning, meeting the baseline of 3 but not elevating 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 'Create a diagonal matrix' clearly states the action and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like sympy_eye (identity) and sympy_ones/sympy_zeros (uniform matrices) by specifying diagonal creation, though it doesn't explicitly compare to them.

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 this tool versus alternatives. No mention of prerequisites or contextual usage, leaving the agent without selection criteria.

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