start_job

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

No annotations are provided, so description is the sole source. It discloses the key behavioral trait 'non-blocking', but does not mention side effects, error handling, or how to retrieve results later.

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 plus args list, no fluff. Purpose is front-loaded, and parameter descriptions are clear and concise.

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?

Covers purpose and parameters adequately, but lacks mention of output or next steps (e.g., monitoring job status). Given no output schema and simple tool, it is minimally complete but could include more context.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates well by explaining both parameters: config as absolute path to .ini file, kind as execution type with allowed values. Adds meaningful context 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 it starts a non-blocking backtest or optimization run, using specific verb 'Start' and resource 'Strategy Tester run'. It distinguishes itself from sibling like 'run_backtest' by specifying 'non-blocking'.

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?

Implied usage through 'non-blocking' suggests when to use versus a blocking alternative, but no explicit exclusions or alternatives are named. Does not guide on when not to use or prerequisites.

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