start_tuning_session

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

Annotation Contradiction: The description says 'Start a durable iterative tuning session,' implying a state-changing action, while annotations declare readOnlyHint=true. This is a serious inconsistency. The description also does not explain side effects, persistence, or permission requirements.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that contains no filler and efficiently conveys the core purpose, defaults, and a policy constraint.

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?

Although an output schema exists, the description is too thin for a 6-parameter tool that starts a durable workflow. It omits guidance on idempotency_key usage, prerequisites, and how this relates to finalize_tuning_session; the annotation contradiction further undermines completeness.

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 67% with descriptions for case_id, max_candidates, execution_limit, and time_limit_minutes. The description adds slight nuance by noting defaults and that explicit multi-hour budgets are accepted conditionally, but it does not explain idempotency_key or database_name. 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 names a specific verb ('Start') and resource ('durable iterative tuning session') and includes key defaults. It clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like get_tuning_session and finalize_tuning_session.

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 implies usage for beginning an iterative tuning session and notes budget constraints, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives or when not to use it. No sibling tools are named as alternatives.

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