wafle_ads_sync_full

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

Beyond annotations, the description discloses that the tool waits until the sync finishes, emits progress notifications, and is long-running (5+ minutes for large catalogs). This adds meaningful behavioral context not present in 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 brief, front-loaded with the core action, and well-structured into two short paragraphs. Every sentence adds value: the action, the wait behavior, the progress notifications, the duration, and the alternative for fire-and-forget.

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 description covers the main behavior (wait, progress, long-running) but lacks details about the return value, error behavior, or how parameters like timeout_seconds interact with the process. The mention of 'underlying create endpoint' is vague, and there is no output schema to fill the gap.

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 provides no parameter-level details. While the schema has a description for 'filters', 'connection_id' and 'timeout_seconds' are undocumented in both the schema and the description. With schema coverage at only 33%, the description should compensate but does not.

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 states a specific action: run a full ads-platform catalog sync and wait until it finishes. It distinguishes from fire-and-forget behavior by explicitly pointing to the underlying create endpoint, making the tool's purpose clear and differentiated.

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 use this tool when you need to wait for completion and receive progress notifications, and it names the alternative for fire-and-forget scenarios ('call the underlying create endpoint directly'). This is clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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