execute_script

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

The term 'guarded' hints at safety but is undefined. No information about side effects, required permissions, rate limits, or return behavior is given. Without annotations, the description fails to disclose important behavioral traits for a code execution 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 a single sentence that is too terse and lacks structure. It omits critical information that should be present, making it under-informative rather than concise.

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 tool that executes user-provided code, the description is severely incomplete. It should explain safety guarantees, error handling, output format, and typical use cases. With 3 parameters and no schema documentation, the description fails to provide a complete picture.

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%, meaning the description does not explain any parameter. The description omits what 'tier' values control, what 'code' should contain, and the effect of 'dry_run'. The agent must infer all parameter meaning from the schema alone, which is insufficient.

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 that the tool executes two types of code: 'ezdxf Python' and 'raw OpenSCAD'. The verb 'execute' and the specific environments differentiate it from sibling tools that perform specific operations like drawing or modeling.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus sibling tools. The description does not mention when to avoid it or suggest alternatives, leaving the agent uninformed about context.

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