execute_computer_action

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits like side effects or safety. It only states the action is executed, without noting potential destructiveness (e.g., clicks can change state) or if the tool is idempotent.

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 single-sentence description is concise but overly vague. It does not front-load critical details, making it less useful for quick comprehension. Every sentence should earn its place, but this one lacks specificity.

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 tool is complex with nested objects and multiple action types, but the description omits what happens after execution (return value) and behavioral nuances. No output schema is provided, so the description should compensate but fails.

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?

The input schema provides detailed descriptions for all parameters, including nested action properties. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 'Execute a computer action on the sandbox' clearly states the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_screenshot and cleanup_sandbox by implying it's a generic action executor, though not explicitly differentiating.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_screenshot or cleanup_sandbox. The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent without selection criteria.

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