mcp2term

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It mentions 'live stdout/stderr streaming' which adds behavioral context beyond the schema, but fails to disclose critical traits like security implications, permission requirements, potential destructive effects, rate limits, or error handling. For a shell execution tool, this is a significant gap.

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?

Perfectly concise single sentence that front-loads the core purpose. Every word earns its place with no wasted text or redundancy.

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 high complexity (shell execution with 6 parameters), no annotations, and 0% schema coverage, the description is inadequate. While an output schema exists, the description doesn't address security concerns, error cases, or parameter usage that are critical for this type of tool.

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%, so the description must compensate. It mentions no parameters at all, leaving all 6 parameters (command, working_directory, environment, timeout, command_id, allocate_pty) undocumented. The description adds no meaning beyond what the bare schema provides.

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 ('execute') and resource ('shell command') with the specific behavior of 'live stdout/stderr streaming'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like cancel_command and send_stdin by focusing on execution rather than management or input. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from manage_file which might also involve execution.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like cancel_command or send_stdin. The description implies usage for executing shell commands with streaming output, but lacks context on prerequisites, when not to use it, or comparisons to siblings.

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