local_ydb_start_dynamic_node

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

Annotations already provide idempotentHint and non-destructiveHint. The description adds valuable behavioral information: 'Without confirm=true this returns a plan only,' which is not covered by annotations. However, it does not elaborate on the plan's nature or success outcomes.

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?

Three concise sentences: purpose, usage guidelines, and plan-only behavior. No redundant information. Each sentence serves a distinct and essential function.

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 description covers the main use case, prerequisites ('existing CMS tenant'), and the plan-only mode. It references related tools for extra nodes. Minor gaps: no mention of output format or success indicators, but sufficient for this specialized tool with zero output schema.

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 100% and each parameter has a description. The description reiterates the confirm parameter's behavior but does not add new meaning beyond the schema. 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 clearly states the action: 'Start the configured primary dynamic tenant node for an existing CMS tenant.' It also distinguishes from sibling tool local_ydb_add_dynamic_nodes by noting its use for extra nodes. The verb+resource is specific and differentiated.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'after local_ydb_create_tenant or when admin status is PENDING_RESOURCES.' Provides an alternative: 'use local_ydb_add_dynamic_nodes for extra nodes.' This gives clear context and exclusions.

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