linux_linux_command_builder

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

Discloses that input is shell-quoted and destructive options are warned, but no annotations exist. Does not clarify execution context (builds commands, does not run them) or other behavioral traits.

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?

Concise and front-loaded with purpose. Includes useful pointers but could be slightly more structured. Generally efficient.

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?

High-level summary of tool capabilities; refers to describe_tool for full details. Lacks output schema and does not specify return format, leaving gaps for a complex 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 coverage is 0%, and description does not explain the 'tool' or 'fields' parameters or their subproperties. 'Every flag explained' refers to output, not input parameters, so minimal added meaning.

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?

Description clearly states it builds common Linux command lines from a form, lists specific tools (find, grep, etc.). Distinguishes from sibling tools by naming the exact commands it supports.

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?

Implies usage for building command lines, mentions destructive warnings, but does not explicitly state when to use this vs alternatives or when not to use it. Refers to describe_tool for more guidance.

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