sympy_gt

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. However, it fails to disclose any behavioral traits: whether it evaluates to a boolean, creates a symbolic inequality, requires specific input types, or has side effects.

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 this brevity comes at the cost of clarity and completeness. It does not convey the tool's purpose adequately.

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 and simple parameters, the description is severely lacking. No explanation of return values, input constraints, or relationship to SymPy's gt function is provided.

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% with descriptions 'Left-hand side' and 'Right-hand side', so baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 greater than' is a tautology of the tool name, offering no specificity about what the tool does (e.g., creates a symbolic GreaterThan object or returns a boolean). It does not differentiate from siblings like sympy_lt or sympy_ge.

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 vs alternatives like sympy_lt or sympy_ge. The name implies comparison, but no context is provided about typical use cases or when not to use it.

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