execute_luau

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return behavior (result of last expression) but fails to warn about potential side effects, that arbitrary code can modify the scene, error handling, or the implications of running code in the plugin context. This is a significant omission for a code execution tool.

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 exactly two sentences, with the first clearly stating the action and the second specifying the return value. There is no redundant or ambiguous wording, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

While the description covers the core function and return value, it lacks essential context for a code execution tool: no mention of side effects, sandboxing, error behavior, or when to prefer this over the available instance-specific tools. The single parameter makes the basic mechanics clear, but the missing safety and usage context lowers the completeness.

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 schema provides 100% coverage with a self-explanatory parameter description. The tool description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already states, aligning with 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 clearly states the verb 'Execute' and the resource 'arbitrary Luau code in the Studio plugin context'. It also specifies that it returns the result of the last expression, which further clarifies its purpose. This is distinct from sibling tools that perform specific instance operations.

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 phrase 'arbitrary Luau code' implies it is for custom logic beyond the specific tools, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving the condition implied rather than stated.

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