forge_start

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden, and it does disclose the key behavior: starting a run and returning the first phase, with an imperative not to skip phases. It doesn't mention permissions, persistence, or cancellation, but for a start-tool the main behavioral contract is clearly stated.

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?

Three sentences, with the core purpose first, then return behavior, then workflow guidance. Every sentence carries information needed for correct use, and there is no filler.

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 2-parameter start tool with no output schema, the description provides the essential return info (first phase and goal), the required inputs are fully documented in the schema, and the follow-up tool sequence is explicit. An agent has enough context to invoke it correctly and continue the pipeline.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters clearly ('Project directory where the pipeline runs' and 'The user's request, verbatim'). The description restates the request concept but adds no new meaning or formatting details 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 names a specific action ('Start'), a specific resource ('a new forge pipeline run'), and a concrete entry point ('first phase (classify) and its goal'). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like forge_next and forge_complete_phase, which handle later phases.

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?

It states exactly when to use the tool (at the beginning) and explicitly routes the agent through the subsequent flow: 'follow the flow phase by phase using forge_next and forge_complete_phase — do not skip phases.' This both names alternatives and gives an exclusion (no skipping).

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