Catalog Run Agent

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

The description discloses key behavioral traits beyond annotations: the run is asynchronous, results are applied in the background, and completion requires polling. It also states the cannot-stop limitation, which is critical operational context. No contradiction with the annotations.

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 concise and front-loaded, with the core action in the first sentence. Every subsequent sentence adds useful context: background application, polling, and the stop limitation. No filler or redundancy.

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 single-parameter tool with an output schema and annotations, the description fully covers what the tool does, how it behaves, how to track it, and its limitation. Nothing call-critical is missing.

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%, and the agent_id parameter is already documented as the ID of the agent to run with a pointer to catalog_list_agents. The main description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: it 'Starts a catalog discovery agent run' and explains the agent will crawl its data source and populate/refresh metadata. This clearly distinguishes it from related tools like catalog_list_agents or catalog_get_agent_history.

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 explicitly says to poll catalog_get_agent_history to track completion, which gives the agent a follow-up path. It also notes that the API can only start an agent, not stop one, preventing misuse. It doesn't explicitly enumerate all sibling alternatives, but the usage context is clear.

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