edgegate_run_gate

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the asynchronous nature (returns a run_id to poll later). It does not mention side effects, required permissions, or potential failures, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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, well-structured sentence that immediately states the action and the key output. It is concise without 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?

Despite having three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides only minimal workflow context. It omits parameter meanings, workspace requirements, and any caveats, making it insufficient as a standalone guide for an agent.

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?

The schema has 0% parameter description coverage, and the description does not compensate. It implies the role of pipeline_id via 'pipeline,' but workspace_id and model_artifact_id are entirely unexplained, making correct invocation uncertain.

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's function: 'Trigger an EdgeGate run against a pipeline.' The verb 'Trigger' is specific, the resource is identified as an EdgeGate run tied to a pipeline, and the mention of returning a run_id to poll distinguishes it from other run-related tools like edgegate_create_bg_run.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool: to start a run and then poll with edgegate_check_status. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools such as edgegate_create_bg_run or edgegate_rerun_bg, so it stops short of full exclusion guidance.

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