Run an advanced remio CLI command

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

Annotations already flag destructive behavior, and the description adds that state-changing commands need confirm=true, which is not captured in annotations. It also identifies itself as a compatibility entry point, adding context. However, it doesn't discuss output format or error handling, leaving some gaps.

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?

A single, front-loaded paragraph that states purpose, lists commands, and ends with usage guidance. The command list is long but arguably necessary for a catch-all tool. No wasted filler, though it could have been more compact by omitting the enum duplication.

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?

The description covers purpose, preference, and the confirm requirement, making basic invocation possible. However, with no output schema, it should explain what the tool returns or how args/pretty behave, which it doesn't. Adequate for a compatibility wrapper but not complete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only clarifies the confirm parameter; args and pretty are left entirely unexplained. The command list duplicates the schema enum, providing no new parameter-level meaning.

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 opens with 'Compatibility entry point for every remio CLI command' and enumerates all supported commands, making the tool's role unmistakable. It also differentiates from siblings by explicitly telling users to prefer the structured tools above.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: 'Prefer the structured tools above' directly tells when not to use this tool, and 'State-changing commands require confirm: true' gives a concrete usage condition. This is strong alternative/selection advice.

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