list_factories

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool lists only instances visible to the configured Service Principal, implying scoped access, and notes that it returns resource_group values. It does not explicitly state it is read-only, but a listing operation with no side effects is implied. This is adequate transparency for a simple read tool.

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?

Two concise sentences, with the core purpose and return value front-loaded, followed by a crucial usage directive. No wasted words, and each sentence earns its place. Excellent structure.

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 parameterless listing tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential points: what it lists, what it returns (resource_group), and when to call it (first). It is complete enough for an agent to call it correctly without further explanation.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the input schema is an empty object. The description correctly does not mention parameters because none are needed. There is nothing to add beyond the schema, and the baseline for 0 params is 4, but given the clarity of 'no inputs required', a 5 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the verb 'List', the resource 'Data Factory instances', and the scope 'the configured Service Principal can see'. It also differentiates from sibling tools like list_pipelines and list_triggers by emphasizing that it lists factories specifically, and its role as a prerequisite for other ADF tools.

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?

The description explicitly instructs to 'call this first' and explains that every other ADF tool requires the returned resource_group as input. This gives clear, unambiguous usage guidance and points to its role as an entry point, making it easy for an agent to know when to invoke it.

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