Set streaming status to started

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the agent knows this is a mutating, non-idempotent, open-world operation. The description adds a rate limit (100 req/10s per shop), which is useful context beyond annotations. However, it doesn't clarify the destructive nature, what state changes occur, or the confirm parameter's role in preventing accidents. Some value added but gaps remain.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences, with the rate limit front-loaded and the operation stated clearly. No waste.

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 destructive, non-idempotent mutation tool with nested objects and no output schema, the description is too thin. It omits prerequisites, required permissions, what 'services' expects, and any warning about irreversibility. The rate limit is helpful but insufficient for safe invocation.

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 coverage is 80%, so the schema documents most parameters. The description adds no parameter details beyond 'specified services,' which is already in the schema. The confirm parameter's purpose (explicit approval for destructive effect) is in the schema description, not the tool description. Baseline 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?

States a specific verb+resource: 'Sets streaming status to started for specified services.' It implies a counterpart (end_streaming exists as a sibling), though it doesn't explicitly name it. The purpose is clear but lacks direct sibling differentiation.

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?

No guidance on when to use this vs end_streaming or get_streaming_status. The description mentions 'specified services' but doesn't explain prerequisites, which services are supported, or when to prefer alternatives. Implied usage only.

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