Squad Run

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the routing/classification behavior, the pipeline stages, the council/gate/contract preservation, and the delegated-execution return shape. Minor gaps remain around side effects and failure behavior, but the disclosure is strong for a complex orchestrator 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 dense but reasonably sized for the complexity. Every sentence adds meaningful information: pipeline stages, mode semantics, delegation behavior, and usage boundaries. It is slightly jargon-heavy, but no sentence is wasted.

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 has 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description does a good job explaining the overall flow, mode behavior, delegation contract, and when to use it. It could more explicitly describe the return format or conditions for delegated execution, but it covers the primary decision and runtime aspects.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds useful context for mode ('autonomous' vs 'autopilot') and frames the request parameter, but it does not materially enrich the other six parameters beyond what the schema already documents.

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?

Description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Run the full squad pipeline for any request.' It clearly positions itself as the catch-all entry point and distinguishes it from narrower sibling tools by describing the full Research -> Plan -> Implement -> Review flow.

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?

Explicit guidance is given: 'Use when no narrower squad_* tool fits, or for end-to-end work.' It also explains when each mode should be used, e.g., 'Set mode=autonomous for the bounded validator loop or mode=autopilot for the full gated pipeline.'

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