trigger_crawl

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses side effects (optional local saving), token-saving behavior of include_url, and return structure (success/failed platform lists plus news data). It doesn't clarify whether the crawl is synchronous or asynchronous, but covers key behavioral traits.

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 well-structured docstring with a one-line summary, Args section, Returns section, and examples. Every sentence provides value and is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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?

Given the tool has 3 optional parameters and an output schema, the description covers purpose, all parameter semantics, return format, and usage examples. It is self-contained and sufficient for an AI agent to invoke it correctly.

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?

The schema only lists types and defaults with no descriptions. The description compensates fully by explaining each parameter: platforms (list of platform IDs, defaults to all), save_to_local (whether to save to output dir), and include_url (whether to include URLs to save tokens). Examples further demonstrate usage.

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 opens with '手动触发一次爬取任务' which clearly states the verb (trigger) and resource (crawl task), and adds optional persistence. It distinguishes itself from siblings that are read/query tools by being an action-oriented tool.

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?

It establishes clear context: a manual, on-demand crawl trigger with optional persistence. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the purpose is unmistakable given the sibling list is dominated by read/query tools.

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