start_sync_watch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that it starts polling and auto-syncs on Lua file set changes, and gives a precondition, but omits details such as idempotency, whether it blocks, what happens on conflicts, or whether it modifies files.

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?

Two short sentences with the core behavior front-loaded and a labeled context sentence that adds prerequisite and workflow information without waste.

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 tool has no parameters and an output schema exists, so return values need not be described. The description supplies the key precondition and workflow context, though it could say more about side effects or interaction with sibling watch/sync tools.

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 tool takes zero parameters, and the schema is fully described at 100% coverage. No additional parameter semantics are needed in the description, so the baseline of 4 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Start polling the connected folder and auto-sync when the Lua file set changes.' The behavior is distinct from sibling tools like sync_connected and stop_sync_watch.

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?

Explicitly states the prerequisite: 'Use only after connect_sync.' It also provides workflow context, but does not name alternative tools or explain when not to use this in favor of siblings like sync_connected or force_sync_directory.

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