start_ratings_job

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

Discloses async nature, immediate return, and ~60-90s processing time. No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. Could mention error handling or polling limits, but overall transparent.

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 sentences covering action, workflow pattern, and benefit. Zero waste, well-structured.

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?

For a simple async job with no params/output schema, description adequately covers purpose and usage. Could add polling timeout or failure details, but not essential given context.

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?

No parameters exist and schema coverage is 100%. Baseline 4 for zero-param tools; description adds no param info but none needed.

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 starts an async ratings export job and returns a poll_url immediately. It uses specific verbs and resource, and distinguishes the tool from siblings like get_ratings by describing the polling pattern.

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 instructs to call this at workflow start, perform other lookups during processing, then use get_ratings. Provides clear usage context and alternative action, avoiding blocking.

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