wave_start_stream

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of explaining behavior. It only states the operation and endpoint but does not disclose preconditions, side effects, whether the stream must be in a stopped state, error behaviors, or if the operation is idempotent. For a state-changing action, this is a notable gap.

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 a single, directly relevant sentence that front-loads the action and includes the API path. Every word earns its place, and there is no superfluous information.

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 low complexity (one well-documented parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate for selecting and invoking the tool. However, it omits behavioral context such as the stream's required state before starting and what a successful start means, which an agent would benefit from knowing.

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 schema already documents the single parameter with a full description, format, and pattern. The tool description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond the endpoint context, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 stream') and the resource ('by its ID'), and includes the exact HTTP endpoint for precision. This distinguishes it from sibling tools such as wave_stop_stream, wave_create_stream, and wave_list_streams without needing to open schemas.

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 action to use this tool is implied by the name and description: call it when you want to start an existing stream. However, there is no explicit guidance about when not to use it, nor any reference to alternatives like wave_create_stream for new streams or wave_stop_stream for stopping.

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