run_code_cells

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It only mentions that cells run in order and outputs are returned, but does not disclose side effects, error handling beyond the 'stopOnError' parameter, runtime dependencies, or response format.

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, front-loaded sentence of 11 words, efficiently conveying the core action. However, it could be slightly expanded to include essential details without becoming verbose.

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 has 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It lacks context on runtime requirements, error behavior, output structure, and integration with other tools like 'connect_runtime' or 'get_cell_status'.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no value beyond the schema. For example, it does not clarify what 'includeOutputs' or 'timeoutSeconds' do, even though the schema provides defaults and constraints.

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 verb 'runs' and the resource 'a list of code cells', with an emphasis on execution order and per-cell output return. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'run_code_cell' (single cell) and 'run_all_cells' (all cells).

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 implies usage for sequential execution of selected cells, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., 'run_code_cell' for single, 'run_cell_range' for range, or 'run_all_cells' for all). No when-not or prerequisite guidance is given.

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