Request Creator Catalog Enrichment

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

Annotations already declare this as a non-read-only, open-world, non-destructive operation. The description adds important asynchronous behavior: it returns immediately, indexing usually takes minutes, and the agent must poll get_creator_catalog_status until ready_in_catalog. It does not cover idempotency or duplicate-request behavior, so it is not fully exhaustive.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the action, followed by return behavior and the required polling step. Every sentence contributes useful operational context.

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?

Although there is no output schema, the description explains that the call returns immediately and how to retrieve readiness via get_creator_catalog_status. Together with the fully documented input schema and annotations, an agent has enough information to invoke and follow up correctly.

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%, so both platform and username are already documented in the schema. The description adds only the platform scope, TikTok/Instagram, which is already captured by the enum; it does not clarify username formatting 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 uses a specific verb and resource: it queues indexing, crawl, and embed for a TikTok/Instagram creator so the creator can seed a reference search. It is clearly distinct from the sibling status-checking tool and from search_creators.

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 explains the use case, seeding a reference search, and explicitly names the follow-up tool to poll: get_creator_catalog_status. It does not state when not to use this tool or list alternatives, but the intended context is clear.

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