as_ide_call_mcp_tool

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

Annotations already indicate mutability (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructiveness (destructiveHint=true), so the description adds limited behavioral context beyond prerequisites and return value. It could disclose more about error handling or side effects.

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 concise, with a clear opening sentence summarizing purpose, followed by usage guidance and parameter/return specifications. 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?

The description covers purpose, prerequisites, and return type, but could elaborate on how arguments should match the target tool's schema. Given the output schema exists, the description is largely complete for a meta-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?

The description only lists parameter names without adding meaning beyond the schema, which already has detailed descriptions for 'name', 'arguments', and 'timeout'. With 0% schema_description_coverage, the description does not compensate.

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 tool invokes a tool on the IDE's MCP server for live control, using a specific verb ('Invoke') and resource ('tool on MCP server'). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'as_ide_list_mcp_tools' by directing users to discover tool names first.

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?

Provides explicit guidance to use 'as_ide_list_mcp_tools' first to discover available tools, and mentions prerequisites (official MCP Server plugin, running IDE). This helps the agent decide when and how to use the tool.

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