loop_start

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It adequately describes continuous task pickup, review triggers, and meeting organization. It also warns against creating busywork, adding transparency.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. The tip adds extra information without excessive verbosity, though additional structure could improve clarity.

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 complexity of a continuous loop tool, the description explains high-level behavior but omits details like stopping the loop or the exact meaning of 'N tasks'. However, the presence of an output schema may cover return values, so completeness is adequate but not fully detailed.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with a description for the only parameter (team_id). The description does not add further semantic detail beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool starts a company loop for continuous work mode, distinguishing it from other loop-related tools like loop_pause and loop_status. It specifies the behavior: picking up highest-priority tasks, triggering reviews, and organizing meetings when tasks are insufficient.

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?

The description explains when to use the tool (to start the loop) but does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives like loop_advance or loop_next_task. It mentions a tip for '/continuous-mode' but lacks direct usage guidance relative to sibling tools.

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