factor

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

There are no annotations to help, and the description does not disclose behavior beyond the core operation. It omits details like how negative numbers, zero, or large integers are handled, and the output format is unclear.

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 extremely concise at three words and front-loaded, with no wasted text. It earns its place but could benefit from slightly more context without losing 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?

With an output schema present (though not shown), the description need not detail returns, but it still lacks information on edge cases and usage limitations. For a simple tool, it is functional but minimally adequate.

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 fully describes the single parameter 'n' as 'Integer to factor', achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no additional semantic value beyond what the schema provides.

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 an integer' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating what the tool does. It distinguishes well from sibling tools like 'gcd' or 'isprime' which perform different math operations.

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 'factorpadic' or 'isprime'. The description gives no context or exclusion criteria.

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