factor_expression

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It merely restates the purpose without disclosing behavior such as session handling, error cases, or whether integer factoring returns prime factors. This is minimal behavioral disclosure.

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 one concise sentence, front-loaded with the verb, and contains no filler or redundant structured data. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool.

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 simple tool with fully documented schema and an output schema, the description is adequate. However, it lacks usage context such as when to prefer this over similar symbolic operations, and does not mention behavioral notes on sessions or limitations.

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 input schema already provides complete descriptions and examples for both parameters (100% coverage). The description adds no new parameter-level meaning beyond restating that the expression can be an integer, which the schema already says.

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 'Factor a mathematical expression or integer' states a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing factoring from differentiation/integration. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like simplify_expression or expand_expression.

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 alternatives such as simplify_expression or expand_expression. The description only states what the tool does, with no exclusions, prerequisites, or contextual hints.

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