analyzeFactory

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, performance implications, or any side effects. It only lists inputs and outputs, leaving the operational behavior unclear.

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 sentence that is information-dense but still readable. It front-loads the primary action (consolidates) and then lists outputs. It could be slightly more structured by separating the outputs, but it remains concise and purposeful.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must explain return values and interpretation. It lists outputs but lacks details on how to interpret health score thresholds, severity levels, or recommendation usage. For a complex analysis tool, this is insufficient.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain parameter meaning. The baseline of 4 applies here, as there is nothing to add beyond the empty input schema.

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 the tool consolidates data across all factory modules and lists concrete outputs (severity levels, health score, summary, etc.). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that target individual modules or predictions by emphasizing the all-in-one analysis nature.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While it implies use for comprehensive factory analysis, it does not mention alternative tools like predictFactoryHealth or dailySupervisorBrief, nor does it provide use-case exclusions.

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