start_cortical_tiles

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

No annotations are present, so the description must convey all behavioral traits. It only states that the tool launches a stage, but does not disclose side effects (e.g., file creation), blocking behavior, or error handling. This is insufficient for safe invocation.

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 a single sentence with no waste, achieving high conciseness. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity.

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 8 parameters, 4 required, and no output schema visible, the description is insufficiently complete. It fails to indicate return value (e.g., job ID), required inputs, or how the tool fits into the pipeline, despite the pipeline context implied by sibling tools.

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 0%, and the description does not explain any parameter meaning beyond the schema property names. With 8 parameters (4 required), the agent has no insight into what 'input_dir', 'path_to_graph', etc., represent or how to set them.

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 action ('Launch Stage 2: extract') and the resource ('28 sulcal region crops with cortical_tiles'), making the purpose unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools that handle different stages.

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 is provided on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. Sibling tools include many 'start_*' tools for different pipeline stages, but the description offers no context for when this specific stage should be invoked.

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