bw_activate_request

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses key behaviors: it activates all previous loads up to the given request, moves data from Inbound Table to active data table and change log, and is asynchronous. No contradictions.

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 two well-structured sentences. The first sentence front-loads the action and scope, while the second provides important distinctions and asynchronous behavior. No wasted words.

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 prerequisites (aDSO with activation step), scope (all previous loads), asynchronous nature, and post-call monitoring via sibling tools. With only two parameters and no output schema, this is complete and self-contained.

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% with descriptions for both parameters (request_tsn and storage). The description adds context that request_tsn comes from bw_list_requests/bw_run_dtp output and notes that storage defaults to 'AQ', but this mostly mirrors the schema. The additional context about 'all previous loads' is more about overall behavior than parameter semantics, so 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 tool activates loaded data (DSO request activation) and distinguishes it from bw_activate, which does modeling-object activation. The verb 'activate' and resource 'DSO request' are specific, and the differentiation from the sibling tool is explicit.

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?

The description explicitly states when to use (for aDSOs with an activation step) and when not (not for inbound-only staging aDSOs, not modeling-object activation). It also notes that activation is asynchronous and that progress should be monitored via bw_list_requests or bw_get_request.

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