echopath_run_task

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose non-obvious behavior beyond the schema: default-disabled desktop control, the native-handoff precondition, and a named mid-execution state (awaiting_native) with a resume protocol. It omits error/consent/statefulness details, but the handoff lifecycle is meaningful disclosure.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action and default, followed by the conditional and the continuation step. Minimal waste, though the resume instruction overlaps with the echopath_resume tool's own domain.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, and the description covers the key default and continuation workflow. What is missing is the role of session_id and how this tool relates to the closely named task/session siblings.

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, and it explains only the two booleans (allow_native_handoff, allow_desktop_control defaults). It says nothing about 'message' or 'session_id', leaving two of four parameters undocumented anywhere.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Send one task to EchoPath') and adds the key qualifier that desktop control is off by default. However, it does not distinguish this from sibling tools like echopath_start_task, echopath_resume_task, or echopath_resume, leaving an agent unsure why it would pick this entry point over those.

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?

Gives concrete conditional guidance: enable allow_native_handoff only when native computer tools control the same desktop, and on an awaiting_native state complete the subgoal then call echopath_resume with the token. It omits when to use this versus the many sibling task/session tools, but the workflow conditions it does give are explicit.

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