trigger_ingestion

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'fetches new items' but does not explain whether the operation is asynchronous, what side effects occur (e.g., database writes, network calls), or if any confirmation is returned. For a trigger-type tool, this is a significant transparency gap.

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 sentence that front-loads the action and resource, with the parenthetical adding useful context. Every word contributes to understanding, with no unnecessary filler.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description is minimally sufficient to convey its core function. However, it lacks details about the asynchronous nature, return behavior, or what 'ingestion' entails, leaving some context gaps 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 input schema has one parameter, source_ids, with a description ('Specific source IDs (omit for all)') covering 100% of the schema. The tool description adds no extra parameter-level detail, so the baseline score of 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's purpose: 'Trigger content ingestion' with the parenthetical clarifying it fetches new items from specific source types. This distinguishes it from sibling trigger tools like trigger_profile and trigger_synthesis, which have different actions and resources.

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 implies the tool should be used to initiate fetching of new content from external sources, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer it over alternatives or provide any context on prerequisites. 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.