factorial

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. Description adds non-negative integer constraint and overflow at n>170, which is critical behavioral info beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Description is two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no unnecessary words. Efficiently conveys key info.

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 simplicity, the description covers purpose, constraint, and overflow. No output schema needed; return value is standard. Timeout parameter is documented in schema. Complete for the context.

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 50% (timeout described). Description adds that n must be non-negative integer, which supplements the schema's type number. However, it does not fully describe parameter behavior (e.g., expected input range beyond overflow).

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?

Description clearly states 'Factorial of non-negative integer (n!)' which specifies the verb (compute factorial) and resource (non-negative integer). It also mentions overflow condition, and since siblings are other math functions, this tool is distinct.

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 vs alternatives, but the purpose is self-explanatory for a factorial tool. The description implies it's for factorial computation, but does not exclude alternative tools or provide context.

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