run_command

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

Adds useful behavioral details beyond annotations: output capped at 100KB, full transcript saved to log_path, default cwd behavior, and use of bash -lc. Does not contradict destructiveHint or openWorldHint.

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 sentences efficiently convey purpose, execution method, defaults, and output limits. Front-loaded with key information, no wasted words.

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?

Covers core functionality, defaults, and output limits. Could mention blocking nature or security implications, but given no output schema and good annotations, it's reasonably complete.

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 covers all parameters (100% coverage). Description adds minor value for 'command' parameter (notes pipes/redirects work) but otherwise repeats schema info. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states the tool runs a shell command via bash -lc, returns stdout/stderr/exit_code. Distinguishes from sibling tools like list_directory or kill_background by focusing on command execution.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives like run_background or read_file. The description only states what it does, not when to prefer it over siblings.

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