release_start

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

The description discloses key behavioral traits: 'Returns immediately; pipelines run in GitLab on their own time' (async execution). It also explains that inputs are manifest-declared. With no annotations provided, this partial transparency is valuable, though it omits potential side effects or error conditions.

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 highly concise, with three sentences that convey purpose, parameter explanation, and behavioral notes. No superfluous content; every sentence adds value.

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's complexity (4 parameters, nested object in inputs, output schema exists), the description covers core functionality and async behavior but does not detail parameters like coordinate or env. It relies on the user having called release_plan first, which provides context. While adequate, there are gaps regarding parameter semantics and potential errors.

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 description only explains the 'inputs' parameter ('manifest-declared release inputs'). With schema description coverage at 0%, the other parameters (coordinate, env, rfc) remain unexplained, leaving the agent to infer their meanings. The limited parameter clarification is insufficient.

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 action: 'Start a release: build run state from the manifest and fire every ready node.' It also distinguishes from sibling 'release_plan' by advising to call that first, making the tool's specific role evident.

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 explicitly instructs to 'Call release_plan first and show the user what will happen,' providing a clear prerequisite and usage order. While it does not list when not to use this tool, it offers sufficient guidance for proper use.

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