Verify Arithmetic

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds only the word 'safely' and 'whitelisted,' which are implied by annotations. It does not disclose additional behavioral traits like error handling or expression parsing details.

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, well-structured sentence that immediately conveys the core function. It is concise with no redundant information or explanatory 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 tool with one highly documented parameter and an output schema, the description covers essential aspects. However, it lacks details about the whitelist of operators/functions, but these are illustrated in the schema examples.

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 the 'expression' parameter clearly described and with examples. The tool description does not add further parameter-specific 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 clearly states 'safely evaluate an arithmetic expression using only whitelisted operators and functions,' which precisely identifies the tool's action and resource. It is distinct from siblings like 'simplify_expression' or 'solve_equation' that perform different operations.

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 such as 'check_logic' or 'compute_derivative.' It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use, or fallback options.

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