Execute Program

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint, openWorldHint), the description adds 'NOT idempotent — will not be auto-retried', which provides critical behavioral context. There is no contradiction with annotations.

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 brief (two sentences) and front-loaded with the purpose. It efficiently conveys key points, though the structure could be slightly improved for readability.

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 simplicity and good annotations, the description provides adequate context. It lacks information about return values or failure behavior, but this is partially mitigated by the annotations and the tool's straightforward nature.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the description still adds value by specifying 'Get from list_programs' for the id parameter and explaining the confirm parameter's role for protected targets, enhancing understanding 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 clearly states 'Trigger an automation program on the CCU', specifying the verb 'trigger' and the resource 'automation program'. It also distinguishes from siblings by referencing 'list_programs' to obtain program IDs.

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 description indicates non-idempotence and no auto-retry, and directs users to 'list_programs' for IDs. However, it does not explicitly state when to avoid using this tool or mention alternatives among the many sibling tools.

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