aws_run

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It transparently explains the authorization model (read/write/danger) and what kinds of commands fall into each category. This goes beyond a generic 'runs a command' description and gives the agent essential context about side effects and constraints.

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 three sentences with no fluff. It front-loads the core purpose, then efficiently adds permission context. Every sentence contributes meaning, making it highly scannable for an agent.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, how to invoke it, and the authorization requirements. This is sufficient for an agent to select and safely call the tool without additional documentation.

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 has 100% coverage for the single parameter 'command' with a clear description. The tool description adds value by providing realistic example commands and categorizing command types, which helps the agent understand the expected format and scope beyond the schema's generic description.

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 tool's function with a specific verb+resource ('Run an AWS CLI command') and provides concrete command examples ('s3 ls', 'ec2 describe-instances'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like shell_run or git_run by explicitly targeting AWS CLI.

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 provides clear context on when to use the tool and what permissions are required for different operation types (read/write/destructive). It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, but the permission tiers give the agent actionable guidance for selection.

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