Run full assessment pipeline

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

The description adds significant value beyond annotations: it discloses credit consumption, immediate task handle return, and polling requirement. Annotations (readOnlyHint=false) already indicate mutation, but the description enriches transparency.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words. Each sentence delivers essential information.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, the tool's context is incomplete. Missing details on error handling, timeout behavior, and the report summary structure hinder proper invocation.

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 0%, and the description provides no explanation for any of the 4 parameters. For a tool with multiple parameters including arrays and integers, this leaves agents guessing about expected values and constraints.

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 clearly states the action (start, wait, return) on specific resources (existing artifacts, assessment pipeline) and distinguishes from siblings like `air_start_assessment` and `air_wait_for_assessment` by combining start and wait.

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 provides clear context: it consumes credits and returns a task handle for polling. It implicitly tells when to use (full pipeline run) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use.

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