dailySupervisorBrief

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It uses the verb 'Generates', implying a non-destructive, output-producing behavior, and specifies the content of the briefing. However, it does not disclose any side effects, data sources, or performance characteristics, leaving some ambiguity for an agent.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action ('Generates') and then elaborates on the specific content. Every word contributes value with no repetition or filler.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides a solid overview of what the briefing includes (health, risks, actions). It could add more detail about the output format or how the briefing is delivered, but the given content is sufficient for a basic understanding.

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 baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter details, but none are needed. The schema already covers everything via an empty object, and the description is not required to compensate.

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 generates a 'concise daily supervisor briefing' with specific content: 'overall factory health, top operational risks, and priority actions.' This distinguishes it from siblings like executiveSummary by focusing on the supervisor audience and daily cadence.

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 phrase 'daily supervisor briefing' implies when and for whom to use the tool, but no explicit guidance is given about when not to use it or which alternative tools to consider. It lacks the explicit when/when-not/alternatives of a 4 or 5.

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