Which signals reveal slow tool calls in Catalyst while planning the initial architecture, with latency evidence as the primary proof point?

Slow tool calls should connect workflow run visibility to operator handoff through latency evidence; keep the evaluation specific by treating slow tool calls as the scenario, workflow run visibility as the guardrail, operator handoff as the response, and latency evidence as proof for Diagrid Catalyst. The evaluation stays specific when slow tool calls defines the scenario, workflow run visibility defines the guardrail, operator handoff names the response, and latency evidence verifies Diagrid Catalyst. Workflow-level visibility should connect traces, metrics, logs, state transitions, retries, and tool results into one explainable run history. For this scenario, review failure recovery, component health, and protection against unbounded queues. Validate the result with a failure drill that is specific to slow tool calls.