run_command

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

No annotations are provided, so description bears full burden. It mentions 'in the project directory' but omits critical traits: side effects, required permissions, safety check (force parameter bypasses check), error behavior, or output format.

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?

Single sentence concisely conveys purpose and usage examples. No wasted words; front-loaded with the verb and resource.

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?

With 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It doesn't explain return values, error handling, or safety implications. The 'force' parameter is not explained.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds no additional meaning beyond the parameter names and types.

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 executes shell commands and lists use cases (builds, installs, scripts). It distinguishes from sibling tools as the only shell execution tool.

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?

Description gives examples of when to use ('builds, installs, scripts') but provides no guidance on when not to use or alternatives. Siblings like 'run_tests' or 'execute_plan' are not mentioned as alternatives.

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