Run project

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only says 'Press the green flag', implying a start action, but does not disclose side effects, error handling, or whether it blocks or is asynchronous. The mention of 'connected' hints at a prerequisite but is not elaborated.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It is perfectly concise and front-loaded with the core action.

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 parameterless tool, the description is mostly sufficient but lacks context about the required state (e.g., a project must be loaded) and does not differentiate itself from the similar vm_green_flag sibling. This could leave an agent unsure which to invoke.

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 zero parameters, the schema is trivially complete. The baseline for 0 params is 4; the description adds no confusing info, so this score is appropriate.

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 'Press the green flag in connected TurboWarp Desktop userscripts' clearly indicates it runs/executes the current project using a familiar Scratch idiom. It distinguishes from siblings like open_project and save_project, though it doesn't explicitly name them.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as vm_green_flag or stop_project. It doesn't state prerequisites (e.g., a project must be loaded) or conditions for use.

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