it_ops_analyze_cost

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

While the description mentions routing through the platform's dispatcher under JWT/tenant/company scope, it does not disclose behaviors like whether the action is synchronous, what side effects occur, or how results are returned. With no annotations, the description carries full burden but remains vague.

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 concise with two sentences and an Args section, front-loading the core purpose and routing detail. No unnecessary words, though the structure could be slightly more organized for readability.

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?

The description is adequate for a domain agent action, explaining routing and parameters. However, it lacks details on what 'analyze_cost' specifically entails (e.g., what costs, scope of analysis) and what the output looks like, despite the context indicating an output schema exists.

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 description adds clear semantics to both parameters: 'message' as free-text objective and 'inputs' as an optional JSON string for structured data. This compensates for the 0% schema description coverage, providing meaningful context beyond type and default.

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 it runs the 'analyze_cost' action within the it_ops domain, distinguishing the tool's purpose. However, it could better differentiate from sibling it_ops tools that might run other actions or perform related tasks.

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 does not mention when-not-to-use, prerequisites, or preferred contexts, leaving the agent to infer from the name alone.

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