trigger_profile

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It does reveal the core workflow (scraping sitemap, analyzing content) and the cache-bypass behavior for force=true. Still, it omits side effects such as whether an existing profile is overwritten, whether execution is asynchronous, or any permission/rate-limit implications.

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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: the first states the purpose, the second describes the process, and the third highlights the key optional parameter. It is front-loaded and free of fluff.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description must carry more weight. It conveys the tool's action and cache behavior, but does not state what the caller receives (if anything), whether the operation is long-running, or any required setup like having the hostname already registered. These gaps leave the description adequate but not complete.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds only a redundant callout to 'force=true' and does not elaborate on hostname semantics beyond the schema's own parameter descriptions.

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-resource pair ('Generate/refresh a site profile') and elaborates with concrete behavior ('Scrapes sitemap, analyses content'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_profile, which retrieves an existing profile, and trigger_ingestion/trigger_synthesis, which target different 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 usage when a site profile needs to be created or updated, and the 'Use force=true to bypass cache' instruction offers practical invocation guidance. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites beyond the cache behavior.

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