ywm_submit_recrawl

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

The description mentions quota consumption, which is a behavioral constraint. However, with no annotations, it does not disclose other traits like authentication needs, rate limits, or whether it is destructive. It is adequate but leaves gaps.

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?

Single sentence with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the core action and includes a critical behavioral note. Highly efficient.

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 simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the core action and quota impact. It does not explain what happens on success (e.g., task creation), but the sibling tools cover task retrieval so this is acceptable.

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 100% with clear descriptions for both parameters. The description text adds no new meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score 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 (submit URL for recrawling) and a key behavior (consumes quota). It distinguishes from sibling tools like ywm_list_recrawl_tasks and ywm_get_recrawl_task, which are for listing or checking tasks.

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 tool versus alternatives such as ywm_get_recrawl_task or ywm_list_recrawl_tasks. No mention of when not to use it or prerequisites.

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