trigger_batch_backfill

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it is a mutation (starting a job) and enforces a one-job-per-market constraint. Annotations indicate non-readonly, non-destructive, non-idempotent, which aligns with the description. No contradictions.

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 two sentences (three clauses in Chinese) with no wasted words. It front-loads the action and constraint. Every sentence adds value.

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?

No output schema is provided, and the description does not explain return value (e.g., job ID or status) or how to monitor progress. For a tool that triggers an asynchronous operation, this is a significant gap. Missing details on job lifecycle.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description provides context that the symbols array is for a batch of stocks, but does not add meaning beyond what the schema already describes. Years default is mentioned in schema, not in description.

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 verb (trigger) and resource (batch backfill of historical daily data for stocks). It distinguishes from siblings like 'trigger_backfill' by emphasizing 'batch' and multiple symbols. However, it does not explicitly contrast with the singular backfill tool.

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 provides explicit usage context: 'Suitable when a user's portfolio or multiple stocks lack sufficient data and need one-time completion.' It also notes the constraint 'Only one backfill job per market at a time.' However, no mention of alternatives or when not to use is given.

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