register_trigger

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

The description adds meaningful behavior beyond the annotations: the engine auto-runs the simulation template on condition match, optionally POSTs to a webhook, and the tool returns specific fields like trigger_id, status, and condition. It does not fully describe auto_execute semantics or repeated-registration effects, but the annotations already signal state-changing behavior.

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?

Three sentences front-load the core behavior, immediately give concrete examples, name sibling tools for testing/removal, and state the returned fields. No filler or repetition.

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?

With a nested condition object and no output schema, the description compensates by explaining the trigger lifecycle and listing return fields. It is deficient only in not clarifying the auto_execute/execution_webhook_url trigger flow, which would help an agent fully anticipate side effects.

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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds natural-language examples that map to condition fields (e.g., revenue below $80k) but no new parameter details beyond the schema.

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 ('Register a real-time trigger') and explains the trigger's behavior: watching a data source for a threshold condition, auto-running the simulation template, and optionally firing a webhook. It also distinguishes itself from fire_trigger and delete_trigger, which are siblings.

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 clearly states when to create a trigger (threshold monitoring with auto-run/webhook) and names fire_trigger for immediate testing and delete_trigger for removal. It does not mention list_triggers or pause_trigger, so the guidance is good but not exhaustive.

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