scrapeer_run_flow_and_wait

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

Annotations indicate a non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds that it 'Triggers a cloud run, polls until complete, and returns structured results', providing behavioral context beyond annotations without contradiction.

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 well-structured with clear sections, front-loaded purpose, and no fluff. Slightly long but every sentence serves a purpose, making it easy to scan.

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 complex run-and-wait operation without an output schema, the description covers key aspects: what it triggers, how it waits, and how to disambiguate from siblings. It could detail the return structure but 'structured results' is acceptable given the explicit usage guidance.

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 schema already documents all three parameters. The description adds minimal parameter context beyond what the schema provides, mentioning flow ID/name resolution but not max_credits or timeout_seconds semantics.

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 'Execute' and resource 'scraping flow', clearly stating it waits for results. It distinguishes itself from siblings by being 'the recommended way' and explicitly excluding status checking and listing flows.

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?

'USE THIS TOOL WHEN' and 'DO NOT USE' sections provide explicit use cases and alternatives, naming specific sibling tools (scrapeer_get_run_status, scrapeer_list_flows). This is exactly the level of guidance needed.

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