arthas_exec

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

With no annotations, the description clearly discloses the differing behavior between sync commands (returns result directly) and streaming commands (runs in background, returns job ID + log path). This covers the key behavioral traits beyond what is in the input schema.

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?

Two sentences with no fluff. The key distinction (sync vs streaming) is front-loaded. Every sentence adds value.

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?

The description explains return values for both command types, which is good given no output schema. However, it fails to address the relationship with the many sibling tools, leaving the agent without guidance on tool selection, which is a notable gap.

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% and the description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's descriptions for 'command' and 'timeout'. The baseline of 3 is appropriate since the description does not enhance parameter understanding.

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 an Arthas command' and distinguishes between sync and streaming command behavior. However, it does not explicitly differentiate this general executor from the many sibling tools that cover specific commands (e.g., arthas_dashboard, arthas_thread), which could cause ambiguity.

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 arthas_exec versus the dedicated sibling tools. The description implies it handles both sync and streaming commands, but an agent may be uncertain whether to use exec or a specific tool like arthas_dashboard for a dashboard command. Alternatives are not mentioned.

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