nth_root

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the default degree (n=2), which is useful, but says nothing about edge cases such as negative inputs, even roots of negatives, or zero — the cases where a numeric tool most needs disambiguation. Adequate but thin.

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?

Two short sentences with zero waste, front-loading the core operation and then the default. Nothing could be cut without losing content.

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 two-parameter pure math function with full schema coverage and no output schema, this is minimally sufficient. It nonetheless omits any differentiation from root_find and any edge-case behavior, which are the only meaningful gaps left for this tool class.

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 both 'n' and 'value' are already documented, and the description's mention of n=2 as default merely repeats the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb (Calculate) and resource (nth root of a number) so the operation is unambiguous. However, siblings like root_find exist, and the description does nothing to distinguish this tool from that one, so the agent must infer the difference.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives such as root_find. The only contextual hint (default n=2) is a parameter default, not usage guidance, leaving the agent to guess when this tool is preferred over its nearest sibling.

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