Trigger KB Sync

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=false, so the tool is known to be a non-idempotent, mutating operation. The description adds no new behavioral context, such as that the sync may run asynchronously or that it returns a run identifier; it only restates the core action without disclosing side effects.

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 a single, clear sentence that directly states the purpose. It is appropriately sized, with no filler or unnecessary detail, and is easy to parse quickly.

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 tool is a simple trigger with one parameter and no output schema. However, the description does not explain what the caller should expect after triggering, such as whether a sync attempt ID is returned or how to monitor progress. This missing return/outcome information leaves the agent without critical contextual completeness.

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% coverage with a single required parameter cc_pair_id, fully described as 'The connector-credential pair id'. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, but baseline 3 applies since the schema handles parameter documentation completely.

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 'Trigger a sync run for a connector-credential pair' clearly states the action (trigger) and the resource (a sync run for a connector-credential pair). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like pause, resume, and status by emphasizing the sync trigger action.

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 implies the tool is used to start a sync for a given pair, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like checking status or listing attempts. No exclusions or alternative pointers are provided beyond the basic action.

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