run_plan

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions features like variables, conditions, error strategies, and suspend/resume but lacks details on execution order, side effects, or error handling specifics beyond naming abort/continue/capture_image.

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?

Two concise sentences front-load the core purpose and enumerate features with no wasted words. Ideal structure for quick understanding.

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?

No output schema, and description omits what the tool returns (e.g., plan ID, results). For a complex orchestration tool, this is a significant gap. Also lacks details on error strategies and variable scoping.

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 has 100% coverage, so the description adds minimal value beyond high-level feature listing. It groups concepts but doesn't elaborate on parameter usage beyond what schema already provides.

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 it executes a sequential plan of tool steps server-side, listing key features. The name 'run_plan' is self-explanatory, and it distinguishes itself from single-step sibling tools like click, type, etc.

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 usage for multi-step orchestration versus single-step siblings but does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternative tools for simpler tasks.

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