create_crawl_job_route

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

Annotations already disclose the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false). The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not say the crawl runs asynchronously, that it returns a job identifier, or how auto_remove/auto-sync behavior affects the created resource.

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 three-word phrase is technically short, but it is under-specified rather than concise — it omits information the agent needs rather than front-loading useful content. Brevity here reflects a missing description, not efficient writing.

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 9-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and partial field documentation, the description is completely inadequate; an agent cannot form a correct call from it alone. Nothing about the crawl lifecycle, required URL semantics, or parameter defaults is conveyed.

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?

With 9 parameters and only 56% schema description coverage, several parameters (pattern, sitemap_urls, parent_folder_id, minimum_frequency_days) have no documented meaning in either location. The description provides no compensating detail, so it fails to cover the schema's gaps.

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 is just "Create Crawl Job", which restates the tool name with no additional scope, target, or distinguishing detail. It states a verb and resource, but an agent learns nothing beyond the identifier itself, and it is not differentiated from siblings like create_url_document_route or list_crawl_jobs_route.

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?

There is no guidance on when to create a crawl job versus the sibling create_url_document_route, nor any mention of prerequisites (URL required, auto-sync interactions) or follow-up tools like get_crawl_job_route or cancel_crawl_job_route. Usage is left entirely to inference from the name.

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