run_gemini_coding_task

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

Without annotations, the description lists behavioral traits like strict contracts and Git verification, but omits potential side effects, authentication, or irreversible actions. Provides moderate transparency.

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 a single sentence with a bullet-like list of features, which is efficient and front-loaded. Could be slightly more structured but remains clear.

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?

For a 12-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is too brief. It lacks details on return values, error handling, and comprehensive usage context, leaving gaps.

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 low (33%), and the description does not compensate by adding meaning to individual parameters. It mentions features like acceptance-test traceability but does not connect to the schema's acceptanceCriteria parameter.

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 clearly identifies the tool as a deprecated compatibility alias for run_antigravity_coding_task, stating its purpose. However, it does not differentiate itself from the sibling tool beyond being deprecated.

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 deprecation but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives. No guidance on prerequisites or context.

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