start_data_migration

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only gives the title and endpoint, with no mention of side effects, idempotency, authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether the migration is destructive. The user is left uninformed about what happens when starting a migration.

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 (two lines), but it lacks structure and substance. It essentially repeats the tool name and endpoint. While there is no fluff, it fails to convey necessary information. A score of 3 reflects minimal viability without being wasteful.

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 has a nested input schema (3 properties in body) and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return value, potential errors, or what happens after migration is triggered. The tool is more complex than the description suggests, and the agent would lack sufficient context to use it correctly.

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 100%, but the description adds only one piece of information: 'File fields (archive) must be absolute paths to local files to upload.' This clarifies a requirement not in the schema, but does not explain the migration_type enum options or the add_migration_tag parameter. Overall, minimal added value 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 states 'Start Data Migration' which implies initiating a migration process, but it doesn't specify what data or from which sources. The input schema reveals migration_type enum (e.g., nextcloud, chowdown) suggesting import from external services, but this is not in the description. The purpose is identifiable but vague, and does not distinguish from sibling tools like create_recipe_from_zip or parse_recipe_url.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling list includes many data management tools but no other migration-specific tools. The description lacks any context about prerequisites, such as whether a group or certain permissions are needed, or when to use this instead of other import methods.

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