Run macro script

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds behavioral context: it dispatches through tool handlers, dryRun plans without invoking, stopOnError halts on failure, raw Python entries are subject to server-side gate, and redacted args may fail. No contradiction with annotations.

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 only two sentences, tightly packed with information. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, then lists optional behaviors and a warning. No unnecessary 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?

Given the tool's complexity (5 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description covers the main functionality and parameter behaviors. It warns about redacted args but does not detail the MacroRecord structure or return values. It is adequate for selection and invocation.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains all four optional parameters (dryRun, stopOnError, argsOverrides, allowRawPython) with clear purposes. macroPath is implied as the file path. The description adds meaning to the nested argsOverrides object as 'shallow-merge per-tool arg replacements'.

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 replays a MacroRecord JSON file by dispatching entries through tool handlers. The verb 'replay' and resource 'MacroRecord JSON file' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like macro_recorder (recording) and create_macro (creation).

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 explains when to use optional parameters like dryRun for planning, stopOnError for error handling, argsOverrides for arg replacements, and allowRawPython for raw Python entries. It also warns about redacted args. However, it does not explicitly compare to sibling macro tools or state prerequisites like having a MacroRecord from macro_recorder.

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