dataset_ingest

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

The annotations indicate this is a non-readOnly, non-idempotent operation with side effects (openWorldHint=true). However, the description does not elaborate on the asynchronous nature of the job, how to monitor progress, or potential failure modes. It adds minimal behavioral context beyond what annotations already provide.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose. However, it sacrifices necessary detail, which slightly reduces its effectiveness.

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?

The tool initiates an asynchronous ingest job, yet the description fails to explain expected outcomes, status checking, or error handling. Given the lack of output schema and the complexity of the operation, more contextual information is needed for effective use.

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?

With only 33% schema description coverage, the description does not compensate by explaining parameters. It adds no meaning beyond the schema: 'sourceUrl' and 'targetSplit' remain undocumented. The schema's description for 'dataset' is already present, but the description adds no further clarity.

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 specific action ('Start a remote URL ingest job') and the resource ('an existing dataset'). It distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like dataset_upload_file or dataset_upload_folder by specifying 'remote URL ingest'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., dataset_upload_file for local files). There are no prerequisites or conditions mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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