enqueue_nks_generation_jobs

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

Adds real context beyond the annotations: batch cap of 100, single-use confirmation token, product-specific gating (Serum 2 and Omnisphere restricted to deterministic factory pilots until validated), and the explicit exclusion 'does not generate or mark any preset saved'. This clarifies side-effect boundaries well for a non-readOnly, non-idempotent tool.

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 dense but front-loaded sentences; the primary action and scope lead, followed by product limits and the negative scope statement. No filler sentences, though the density borders on terse for a multi-step pipeline tool.

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?

No output schema exists, and while the description covers side effects and constraints, it does not explain how this tool relates to the claim/heartbeat/fail/complete/get_nks_generation_status siblings in the job lifecycle. Adequate for invocation but incomplete for workflow placement.

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 100%, so the schema already documents dryRun, planHash, presetIds, productSlug, and confirmationToken. The description reinforces the batch cap and single-use confirmation but adds little syntax or format detail beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (plan/enqueue) and resource (NKS generation jobs) scoped to 'explicitly selected eligible discovered presets'. It is distinguishable from pipeline siblings like claim/heartbeat/complete_nks_generation_job, though the 'plan or enqueue' duality overlaps with the dryRun flag and is not fully reconciled in prose.

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?

Conveys scope constraints (only explicitly selected eligible presets, batches of at most 100, single-use confirmation) but gives no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives among the NKS job siblings. Usage is implied rather than routed.

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