run_process

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

Adds some behavioral context: mentions mapping parameters for runtime targeting and suggests monitoring for status and downloading dumps for failures. However, with no annotations, it does not disclose async/sync nature, destructive impact, or authentication needs.

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, no fluff. Critical information front-loaded: what it does, how to use mappingParameters, prerequisites, and follow-up. Highly efficient.

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, so the description should explain what the tool returns (likely a task ID). It mentions monitoring and failure handling but does not describe the immediate return value. Missing async behavior hint.

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 covers all parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). Description rephrases mappingParameters purpose ('target a specific dimension') and processId origin ('from show_processes'), but adds minimal new meaning beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states it executes a process as a chain of imports/exports/deletes. Distinguishes from sibling tools like run_import, run_export, run_delete which handle individual actions. Mentions mappingParameters for targeting dimensions, adding specificity.

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?

Gives clear prerequisites ('Use show_processes first') and follow-up actions ('Monitor with get_action_status; download_processdump for failures'). Implicitly differentiates from individual run tools by calling it a chain, but does not explicitly state when not to use alternatives.

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