executiveSummary

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It accurately describes the output (summary with performance, risk, recommendations) and implies a read-only operation, but it doesn't formally declare side effects, permissions, or any limitations. 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?

One concise sentence efficiently communicates purpose and key output components. No filler or redundancy.

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 without an output schema, the description is fairly complete: it lists what the summary covers. It could add a note about whether it aggregates data from other tools, but it's sufficient for basic selection.

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 schema coverage is 100% by default. The baseline for zero-param tools is high, and no additional parameter explanation is needed.

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 a specific verb+resource: it provides a high-level executive summary covering factory performance, revenue exposure risk, and strategic decisions. This distinguishes it from detailed reporting tools, though some overlap remains with analyzeFactory or dailySupervisorBrief.

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. The description implies it's for strategic decision-making, but it doesn't mention exclusions or how it differs from sibling tools like dailySupervisorBrief or analyzeFactory.

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