script_call

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavior: it calls a JS export, accepts JSON-serialisable args, defaults timeout to 10s, and returns the return value or error string. No contradictions.

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 (8 lines) and well-structured with an "Args:" bullet list. Every sentence adds value without repetition or fluff.

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 or annotations, the description covers all necessary aspects: parameter usage, return value, error handling, and prerequisite (script must be loaded via script_load). It is complete for the tool's purpose.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description provides detailed meanings for all 5 parameters: session is session id, name is script name from script_load, method is JS-side export with example, args are JSON-serialisable positional args, timeout_s is RPC timeout with default 10s.

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 uses a specific verb "Call" and identifies the resource as "method on a loaded script's exports". It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like script_load (loads script) and enumerate_exports (lists exports).

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 implies usage after script_load and explains the role of each parameter (session, name, method, args, timeout_s). It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, 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.