trigger_preview

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

Annotations provide basic traits (non-readonly, non-destructive). The description adds specific behavioral details: 'clears skip_auto_preview and queues the preview.' This goes beyond annotations and gives the agent a better understanding of side effects.

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 three sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: stating the action, clarifying context, and explaining behavior plus next step. No filler or redundancy.

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 tool's low complexity (single param, output schema exists), the description covers purpose, usage context, behavioral effect, and next step. It lacks mention of return values but is otherwise complete.

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 100%, with the session_id parameter already described as 'Session ID to trigger preview for.' The description does not significantly elaborate beyond that, but it reinforces usage context by mentioning session_id in the follow-up step. Baseline 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 verb 'Trigger a preview run' and specifies the resource ('preview run') and context ('after structural editing is complete'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by mentioning it is called after row/column edits, providing explicit examples.

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 explicitly instructs when to call this tool ('after finishing row/column edits') and provides follow-up steps ('call wait_for_job(session_id) to track progress'). While it does not mention alternatives or when not to use, the guidance is clear and actionable.

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