trigger_sync

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

Discloses the default response behavior (compact confirmation) and how to get the full response via `verbose`. With no annotations, the description carries the burden; however, it does not mention side effects, whether the sync is asynchronous, or behavior when a sync is already running beyond the `force` parameter.

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 sentences, no wasted words. Front-loads the core action, then adds response behavior. Perfectly sized for the information provided.

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 trigger tool, the description covers the key purpose and response format. It lacks details on auth requirements or error conditions, but the schema fills in parameter meanings and the tool is not complex enough to demand more.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the default response and how `verbose` alters it, but does not go beyond schema for `force` or `connection_id`.

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 the action ('Trigger an immediate sync') and the resource ('for a connection'). Distinguishes from scheduled syncs and sibling tools like `get_sync_status` or `resync_tables` by emphasizing immediate execution.

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?

Provides clear context: use when you want a sync now rather than waiting for the next scheduled interval. Does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use, so just short of a 5.

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