loop_start

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

Discloses that the tool returns only section 0 and the full loop stays in the supervisor. With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but omits details like side effects, idempotency, or prerequisites.

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 sentences, front-loaded with primary action. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Covers purpose and return value, but missing safety context (read-only or destructive), error conditions, and prerequisites. Moderate complexity warrants more 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?

Explains the 'loop' parameter with examples and references loop_library, adding meaning beyond the schema. However, the 'runId' parameter is not elaborated. With 50% schema coverage, the description partially compensates.

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?

Clear verb ('begin', 'opens/activates') and resource ('streaming of bundled or custom local loop'). Mentions specific loop IDs and distinguishes from related tools like loop_register and loop_library. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like loop_next.

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?

Provides examples of when to use specific loop IDs ('strip-miner', 'loop-de-loop'), implying context for use. However, it does not state when not to use this tool or compare with alternatives like loop_next or cycle_decision_request.

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