ghl_train_crawler_urls

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the return value ('Returns { success: true } when training starts'), which indicates asynchronous initiation, but it does not mention potential side effects, rate limits, or whether the operation is destructive. Some behavioral context is added, but not comprehensive.

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 short sentences, each adding distinct value: purpose, data source, and return behavior. No redundancy, front-loaded main action.

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 low-complexity tool with full schema descriptions, the description covers purpose, source of IDs, and return value. It could mention error cases or asynchronous behavior more explicitly, but it is adequate for the tool's scope.

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%, and each parameter already has a description. The description repeats the urlIds source already present in the schema, adding no new parameter information. Baseline 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 uses a specific verb ('Ingest') with a clear resource ('page URLs into the knowledge base for AI training'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like ghl_list_crawler_urls (listing) and ghl_delete_crawler_urls (deletion) by focusing on the training action.

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 to use urlIds from ghl_list_crawler_urls, providing a clear source and workflow context. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the mention of the list tool implies a natural sequence after discovery.

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