run

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the idle condition but does not explain side effects, blocking behavior, error cases, or what happens with timeouts and byte limits. The description is too sparse for a tool with 10 parameters.

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 front-loads the 'Convenience' label and immediately states the core behavior. Every word adds value, and there is no redundant information. It is efficient and easy to parse.

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 10 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely under-specified. It does not explain what the function returns, how it handles session state, or the meaning of 'idle' beyond the parameter name. The convenience wrapper concept is clear, but the operational details are missing.

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 70%, which provides baseline semantics for most parameters. The description adds context for the overall workflow (send then read until idle) but does not clarify the remaining undocumented parameters like strip_ansi or append_newline. It neither over-compensates nor contradicts the schema.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'send a command then read until output is idle.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like send and read, as it combines both actions in a convenience wrapper. The resource (command) is explicit, and the behavior is specific.

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 labels the tool as 'Convenience,' implying it is an alternative to manually calling send and read together. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it instead of those siblings, nor does it mention any exclusions or alternative use cases. This is implied rather than explicit.

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