Run atlas generation

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

Discloses key behaviors: fetches sources, spends LLM budget, rewrites generated subtree, creates output space on first run, returns run_ids and 503 error. Adds value beyond annotations which only indicate non-destructive and non-read-only.

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?

Concise, front-loaded with purpose, and every sentence adds value—no redundancy or fluff.

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 presence of output schema, description sufficiently covers return values (run_ids) and error conditions (503 ai_unavailable), along with permissions and 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?

Schema covers project_id with description, and the description reinforces where to obtain it ('from atlas_list_projects'), aiding in parameter selection and reducing ambiguity.

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?

Description clearly states it triggers a full doc-generation run for all sources in an atlas project. Specific verb 'trigger', resource 'atlas project', and differentiates from sibling tools like atlas_run_status and atlas_list_projects.

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?

Explicitly states management-level access requirement (project owner/org admin), mentions spending LLM budget, and explains the 503 error condition. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance but provides strong context for appropriate use.

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