medeval_start_generation

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

Annotations are sparse (readOnlyHint false, no destructive hint), so the description should disclose behavioral traits. It mentions that 'segmented generation is the safe default', which hints at a strategy difference but does not explain what happens during generation, whether it creates a task, or what side effects exist. This is minimal additional value over the annotations.

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 short sentence, which is concise and front-loaded with the primary action. However, it lacks essential information, so it is under-specified rather than efficiently complete. The brevity is appropriate but not sufficient.

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?

With six parameters, no schema descriptions, and an output schema present, the description should provide context on what generation entails, what the parameters mean, and what the return value represents. It does none of this, making it inadequate for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the six undocumented parameters. It does not explain any of them; 'segmented generation' could relate to generation_strategy but is not explicitly linked. The description adds no meaning to any 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 states the action ('Start generation') and a precondition ('after explicit authorization'), which is clear enough given the tool name. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from the sibling 'medeval_start_evaluation', which could be confused, but the resource (generation vs evaluation) is implied by the name.

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 does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives like medeval_start_evaluation. It mentions 'explicit authorization' as a prerequisite but provides no context on when generation is appropriate or when another tool would be better. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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