Run Command

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds context about the allow/deny security policy, output cap at 4000 characters, and the dryRun and confirmationToken features. This goes beyond what annotations provide, though the output cap is not detailed further.

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 concise with 4 sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and every sentence adds value. No wasted words.

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 no output schema, the description covers the main aspects: execution method, security, output limit, and alternatives. It lacks explicit mention of return format or error handling, but the output cap is noted. For a command execution tool, it is fairly complete.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add additional meaning to parameters beyond what is in the schema. It mentions the allow/deny policy in general but does not elaborate on parameter behavior.

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 it executes arbitrary RouterOS console commands via SSH, specifying the verb 'Execute', the resource 'RouterOS console command', and the method 'SSH'. It distinguishes from sibling tools by mentioning 'Use dedicated tools (reboot, etc.) for controlled operations'.

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 guidance on when to use (arbitrary commands) and when not to (use dedicated tools for controlled operations). It also explains the allow/deny policy and configuration options. However, it does not explicitly list all alternative tools, but the context is clear.

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