run_loop

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

With no annotations, the description carries full transparency burden. It discloses that reports are written to the 'Loom Reports' folder, but does not mention side effects, permissions, or whether loops are asynchronous. Adequate but not detailed.

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, front-loaded with the main action, then enumerates loop variants. No redundant information. Every sentence adds value.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is mostly complete. It covers all loop variants and output location. Missing info: whether loops run synchronously or asynchronously, or any prerequisites.

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% with a described enum. The description adds significant meaning by explaining the outcome of each enum value (e.g., 'writes a health report', 're-indexes files'). This goes beyond the simple schema description.

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 ('Trigger') and resource ('Loom background loop') and clearly lists each loop variant with its purpose. It distinguishes from siblings which are unrelated (notes, vault stats, etc.).

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 each loop (health report, stale review, re-indexing, all due) and implies that the agent should choose based on task. It lacks explicit 'when not to use' or alternatives, but siblings are very different so guidance is adequate.

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