start_crew_run

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses key behaviors: LLM turn flow via MCP sampling, SAMPLING_NOT_SUPPORTED fallback, and was_duplicate on idempotent retry. This is comprehensive and beyond minimal.

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 purpose and return type, then provides behavioral details. It is informative but slightly long; could be tightened without losing substance.

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 tool with 4 parameters (2 required), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is remarkably complete: it explains the action, return type, edge cases (sampling not supported, duplicate), and idempotency key usage.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context about was_duplicate and retry safety (task_id) but does not elaborate on other parameters 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?

The description clearly states the tool's verb ('start a Crews Council run'), resource ('run row on UnClick API'), and return type ('ConversationalCard'). It distinguishes from siblings by being unique in the large list of tools.

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 says 'Call this tool when the user wants to start a Crews Council run', providing clear context. It does not mention when not to use or alternatives, but the sibling list is vast and unrelated.

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