sympy_limit

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior but only says 'Compute a limit.' It does not explain what the output looks like (symbolic vs numeric), error conditions, or side effects. Critical behavioral context is missing.

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?

While the description is very short, it is underspecified rather than concisely informative. It does not front-load key details like the nature of the limit or the expected input formats.

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 output schema exists, return values are not required, but the description still fails to provide essential context about the mathematical operation, such as handling one-sided limits, infinities, or complex expressions.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds no additional meaning beyond 'Compute a limit.' so it does not compensate for any gaps. Baseline 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 'Compute a limit.' states the verb and resource clearly, but lacks differentiation from sibling tools like sympy_diff or sympy_integrate. It is not a tautology, but it is too brief to fully clarify the specific kind of limit computation.

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. There is no mention of limitations, prerequisites, or exclusive use cases, leaving the agent without decision support.

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