it_ops_detect_waste

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only mentions routing through a dispatcher and JWT/tenant/company scope. It does not disclose whether the action is read-only or destructive, what happens on failure, or any side effects. This is insufficient for behavioral understanding.

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 short (3 sentences plus bullet args) and front-loaded with the primary action. It is efficient, but the brevity sacrifices necessary explanatory content.

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?

Given the tool's purpose is unclear and there is an output schema (unseen), the description fails to explain what the tool does, what the output represents, or how to use it effectively. It is incomplete for an agent to make an informed 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds basic meaning: 'message: Free-text objective' and 'inputs: Optional JSON string of structured inputs'. This provides minimal clarification but lacks detail on expected format or examples, rendering it adequate but not strong.

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 states it 'Run the it_ops domain agent action `detect_waste`' but never explains what 'detect_waste' does or what detecting waste means in this context. The name suggests waste detection, but the purpose remains vague without connecting to any specific outcome or resource.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like it_ops_analyze_cost or it_ops_rightsizing_recommendations. The description lacks any context about appropriate use cases or alternatives.

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