b24_bizproc_start

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says the process is started, without explaining side effects, permission requirements, whether the operation is asynchronous, or what happens to the target record. This is a meaningful gap for a mutating workflow action.

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 clear sentence with no redundant wording. It is appropriately concise and front-loaded, though it could have used the spare space to add behavioral or usage context.

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?

For a mutating tool with no annotations, no output schema, and five parameters, this description is too minimal. It leaves out what the response will be, when to use the tool, and what side effects to expect. The schema covers parameter formats, but the overall operational context is incomplete.

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 80%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The tool description itself adds no parameter-level meaning, but this is acceptable because document_id and template_id are reasonably explained in the schema. The main description does not compensate for the undocumented webhook_url parameter.

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 uses a specific verb ('inicia') with a concrete resource ('proceso de negocio/workflow sobre un documento o registro CRM'). It clearly communicates the tool's core action and naturally distinguishes it from siblings such as b24_bizproc_list or b24_crm_create.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention b24_bizproc_list or any other sibling, nor does it describe prerequisites, context, or exclusions. The intended usage must be inferred solely from the tool name and generic action.

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