start_collection

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the behavioral burden. It honestly discloses that the function returns immediately while the real work takes 20–40 minutes, and that disabling crawl is faster but drastically reduces confirmed results. This is valuable async-behavior context beyond the schema.

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 front-loaded with the core action and async behavior, followed by a well-organized Args list. Each line adds practical value, especially the measurements and field tips, so no sentence feels wasted for a 9-parameter tool.

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 description is strong for parameters and async behavior, but it does not specify what the immediate return value contains. Since there is no output schema and the agent likely needs a collection ID to pass to check_collection or cancel_collection, this is a meaningful gap in an otherwise complete description.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must fully explain parameters. It does: keyword includes language and empirical yield tips, region is tied to phone normalization, lat/lng requires coordinates, grid explains Google Maps' ~120-result truncation, and crawl quantifies the tradeoff. Every parameter receives meaningful, actionable guidance.

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 states a specific action: starting a Google Maps collection of hospitals/clinics while looking for WhatsApp contacts. It clearly distinguishes start_collection from its siblings like check_collection and cancel_collection by emphasizing that it launches a long-running task and returns immediately.

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 gives explicit guidance to use check_collection to monitor progress, and explains practical tradeoffs like crawl on/off affecting speed and confirmed-rate. It does not exhaustively contrast with all siblings, but the key alternative flow is clearly indicated.

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