prime_operations

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

The description states the three operations but does not disclose edge cases, performance characteristics, or any side effects. Since there are no annotations, the description carries the full burden; it is adequate but minimal.

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 extremely concise: one sentence for purpose, then a bullet-style parameter list. It front-loads the key information and wastes no words.

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 two parameters, the description covers the operations and parameters. It does not describe return values, but an output schema exists (not shown) which likely handles that. Missing return format description prevents a 5.

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?

The description adds meaning by explaining the 'operation' parameter's allowed values and the role of 'value'. With 0% schema coverage, this compensates well, though enumerating the operation values explicitly would earn a 5.

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 lists three specific operations: check primality, find next prime, and factorize. It uses strong action verbs and distinguishes this tool from other number operations among siblings.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like factorial_calculator or fibonacci_sequence. It implicitly covers its own usage but lacks explicit when-not or comparison with siblings.

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