factor_expression

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

No annotations are present, and the description provides minimal behavioral detail—it does not specify factoring domain (e.g., integer coefficients, rationals), output format, or error behavior. This leaves the agent to infer safety and side effects.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It earns full marks for conciseness.

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 one-parameter tool, the description provides the essential purpose, but it lacks guidance on when to use it relative to sibling tools and omits behavioral context like output format or domain. Given the presence of an output schema, it is minimally adequate but not comprehensive.

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 single parameter 'expression' is fully described in the schema with examples, and the tool description reinforces that it accepts both expressions and integers. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline is 3, and the description adds little beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb 'factor' and identifies the resource as 'mathematical expression or integer', clearly distinguishing from sibling operations like expand or simplify. It is direct and unambiguous, though it does not elaborate on the mathematical domain.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as simplify_expression or expand_expression. The description simply states the operation without context, exclusions, or when-not usage.

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