filtered_shell

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full burden. It discloses the filtering strategy and preservation of actionable info, but fails to mention potential side effects of arbitrary command execution (e.g., destructive changes, required permissions, or security risks). This is a significant gap for a command 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 extremely concise – two sentences front-loaded with the core action and key benefit. Every phrase contributes meaning without waste.

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 the main purpose and benefit but lacks details on parameter usage (especially filter_level), output format (no output schema), and safety warnings. It is minimally adequate for a 4-parameter tool with no annotations.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds context about filtering but does not elaborate on the filter_level enum values or how to choose them. It adds some value but not enough to exceed baseline.

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 a shell command with intelligent output filtering. It specifies the key differentiator (detects command type, applies optimal filter) and distinguishes from siblings like filtered_grep (focused on grep) and smart_git (git-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 implies usage for general shell commands with filtering to reduce tokens, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like filtered_grep or smart_git. No when-not or exclusion criteria are given.

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