rhino_daylight_factor

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly and idempotent. Description adds context about the simplified model and scope (side-lit rooms), but does not detail behavioral constraints beyond the formula. No contradictions.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences and a formula. Front-loaded with purpose and formula, no wasted 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?

Provides method and scope clearly. Does not explain return values, but output schema likely covers that. Missing guidance on typical values or prerequisites, but acceptable for a simple calculation tool.

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%, but the formula in description maps variables (W, theta, tau, M, A_total, R^2) to parameters indirectly. Schema itself already has good descriptions for each parameter, so description adds limited semantic value beyond the formula.

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?

Clearly states it calculates 'BRE simplified daylight factor for a side-lit room' and provides the formula. Distinguishes from sibling analysis tools like rhino_curvature_analysis and rhino_draft_angle by being a specific daylight metric.

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?

Explicitly says 'For early-stage architectural studies; for radiance-grade accuracy use ladybug-tools or DAYSIM.' This defines when to use and recommends alternatives for higher precision.

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