trigger_deep_analysis

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 says 'Start deep analysis' but does not disclose whether the operation is asynchronous, what it returns, or that you may need to poll get_deep_analysis_status. This lack of behavioral context is a significant gap.

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 that starts with the action, states the resource, and gives the purpose. No wasted words.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should explain what the tool returns or what happens after triggering. It does not mention the response or that the user should subsequently check status, leaving the workflow incomplete.

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 schema provides a description for upload_id (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no further semantic detail beyond what the schema already states.

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?

Specific verb 'Start' + resource 'deep analysis for an upload' clearly distinguish it from the sibling get_deep_analysis_status. It also states the purpose: to inspect domain legitimacy, website/SSL signals, and matched organisation data.

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?

Usage is implied: use when you want to initiate deep analysis for an upload. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this vs. alternatives like validate_email or check_credits, nor any mention of prerequisites or next steps.

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