kimi_run

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

The description discloses a key behavioral trait: the Kimi CLI may read, edit, and run commands in the working directory. This is critical side-effect information, especially with no annotations available. It also notes the session is non-interactive. However, it omits details about authentication, output handling, and session lifecycle.

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 two sentences, with the first sentence front-loading the purpose and the second delivering a concise warning. No redundant or filler content—every word earns its place.

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 executes potentially arbitrary commands in a working directory, yet the description does not explain what happens after starting the session, how results are returned, or that it may run asynchronously and require status checks via sibling tools. With no output schema and no annotations, the description leaves critical operational details uncovered.

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 already provides descriptions for prompt and work_dir, though terse. The description adds value by advising to 'scope the prompt and work_dir carefully,' which implies their importance. However, the third parameter, timeout_seconds, is left completely unexplained, leaving a gap in parameter 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 specific action (start a new non-interactive session), the resource (Kimi Code agent), and the working directory. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like kimi_resume (resuming sessions) and kimi_list_sessions by emphasizing 'start a new' and 'non-interactive'.

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 for starting new sessions and warns to scope the prompt and work_dir carefully, but it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool instead of alternatives like agents_spawn or kimi_resume. No clear 'when not to use' guidance is provided.

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