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. It states 'Find roots of polynomial' but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether it returns exact or approximate roots, handles complex roots, requires specific polynomial forms, or has limitations (e.g., degree constraints). This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 ('Find roots of polynomial.') that is front-loaded and wastes no words. It could be slightly more specific (e.g., mentioning variable or expression format) but is appropriately sized for a simple tool.

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 moderate complexity (polynomial root-finding), no annotations, and an output schema (which covers return values), the description is minimally adequate. It states the purpose but lacks behavioral details and usage context, making it incomplete for optimal agent understanding without additional structured data.

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 clear descriptions for both parameters ('expr' as 'Polynomial expression' and 'variable' as 'Variable'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline of 3 without compensating or detracting.

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 'Find roots of polynomial' clearly states the verb ('find') and resource ('roots of polynomial'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'sympy_solve' or 'sympy_solveset' which might also find roots, leaving the distinction unclear.

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. With many sibling tools (e.g., sympy_solve, sympy_solveset) that could handle similar tasks, the description lacks any context about specific use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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