sympy_exp

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

With no annotations provided, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention domain restrictions (e.g., complex numbers), return type, or edge cases (e.g., exp(0)=1). The tool's behavior is only implied by its name.

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 at two words, but it is front-loaded and to the point. While it could benefit from slight expansion, it does not contain any fluff.

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?

For a simple mathematical function with one parameter and an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks context about what the exponential function does mathematically (e^expr) and potential pitfalls (e.g., large values).

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?

Schema coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'expr', which is described as 'Expression' in the schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond that, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Exponential function' clearly identifies the tool's purpose as computing the exponential of an expression, aligning with the name sympy_exp. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like sympy_log or sympy_sqrt, which are also single-argument mathematical functions.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when an expression involves exponentials vs logarithms. There are no prerequisites, examples, or exclusions mentioned.

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