catalan

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. While '计算' (calculate) implies a read-only computation, the description doesn't disclose important behavioral traits: it doesn't mention what happens with invalid inputs (like negative n, though Catalan numbers are typically defined for non-negative integers), potential performance characteristics, error conditions, or the format/type of the return value. For a mathematical computation tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps.

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 Chinese sentence that states exactly what the tool does with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple mathematical function and front-loads the core purpose immediately. Every word earns its place in conveying the essential information.

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 this is a mathematical computation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what Catalan numbers are for users unfamiliar with them, doesn't specify valid input ranges, doesn't describe the return type or format, and doesn't mention any mathematical properties or constraints. For a tool that could have domain-specific requirements, this leaves too much unspecified.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. The description mentions '第n个' (the nth) which provides semantic context for the parameter n, indicating it's an index/position. However, it doesn't specify valid ranges (Catalan numbers are typically defined for n ≥ 0), doesn't explain what n represents mathematically, and doesn't mention constraints like integer requirements or typical usage bounds. With 1 parameter and 0% schema coverage, the description adds minimal value beyond the parameter name.

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 '计算第n个卡塔兰数' (calculate the nth Catalan number) clearly states the specific mathematical operation being performed. It uses a precise verb ('计算' - calculate) and identifies the exact resource (Catalan number), distinguishing it from all sibling tools which perform different mathematical functions like factorial, fibonacci, or trigonometric 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 implies usage context through the mathematical term '卡塔兰数' (Catalan number), suggesting this tool should be used when Catalan numbers are needed. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or constraints beyond the parameter n. The mathematical context is clear but not explicitly stated as usage guidance.

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