mcp-sympy

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Transpose a matrix' implies a mathematical transformation but reveals nothing about error handling, input format requirements, computational complexity, or what the output looks like. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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 a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple mathematical operation and front-loads the core action immediately.

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 tool's mathematical simplicity, 100% schema coverage, and existence of an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, with no annotations and many sibling tools, it lacks context about when to use it or behavioral details that would help an agent invoke it confidently.

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%, with the single parameter 'matrix' documented as 'Matrix string' in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline score when schema coverage is high.

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 'Transpose a matrix' clearly states the verb ('transpose') and resource ('a matrix'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from its many siblings (like sympy_matrix_inverse or sympy_matrix_multiply) beyond the basic operation name, which prevents a perfect score.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many matrix-related siblings (e.g., sympy_matrix_inverse, sympy_matrix_multiply), there's no indication of when matrix transposition is appropriate or what prerequisites might be needed.

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