start_app

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds meaningful behavioral context: it waits up to wait_seconds, then continues in the background, and warns that 'Started does not mean ready,' which is important for interpreting results.

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 four compact sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by essential async and readiness caveats. Every sentence adds distinct operational 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?

With no output schema, the description does a good job explaining async completion and the wait/background behavior. It is not fully complete for a five-parameter mutation tool because it leaves prerequisites and the relationship between application_id, project_id, and desk_url unaddressed.

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 only 40%, so the description must compensate but only partially does. It clarifies wait_seconds behavior and implies that service_names controls the 'selected services' scope, but it does not explain application_id, project_id, or the structure of service_names.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: start all or selected services as one operation. It clearly states the scope of the action, though it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives such as stop_app or deploy_app.

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?

Usage is implied by 'start all or selected services,' but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus stop_app, deploy_app, or update_app. Prerequisites and when-not conditions are not stated.

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