trigger_report_tool

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the external callback chain (Metsuke POSTs to the Trentina alert endpoint, forwarded to the owning gatherer) and the configuration prerequisites (TRENTINA_ALERT_URL + METSUKE_ALERT_TOKEN). It does not say whether the call blocks until the gather finishes, nor what happens on failure when the callback is unconfigured.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the imperative action, then mechanism, then prerequisite. The middle sentence on the alert endpoint is somewhat internal but earns its place as behavioral context; overall tight.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the prerequisites and side-effect path are stated. The main remaining gap is the synchronous/asynchronous nature of the trigger and error behavior, but for a one-parameter tool this is largely complete.

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% and the single parameter is documented in-schema with an example value, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning about the name parameter beyond what the schema already provides.

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 and resource: fire a report gather immediately rather than on its schedule. The action is unambiguous and clearly distinct from the list/get/upsert/delete siblings, though it never names or contrasts them explicitly.

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?

"Right now, without waiting for its schedule" gives a clear condition for selecting this tool over simply letting the scheduler run. No explicit when-not or alternative tool is named, but the triggering context is well defined.

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