run_command

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose all behavior. It mentions sudo auto-escalation but omits critical traits: destructive potential, security implications, timeout behavior, output format, environmental constraints. For an arbitrary command execution tool, this is insufficient.

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 with no filler. Front-loaded with verb and resource. Every word earns its place.

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 or annotations. Given the complexity of arbitrary command execution, the description should cover return values, error handling, and safety warnings. It is under-specified for safe agent usage.

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 covers 100% with clear parameter description. The tool description adds only the auto-escalation context, which is behavioral not semantic. Baseline 3 is appropriate since schema already handles parameter 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?

Description uses specific verb 'Execute' and resource 'arbitrary shell command', clearly distinguishing it from sibling run_* tools that are specific to particular executables. The auto-escalation detail further clarifies capability.

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?

No guidance on when to use this generic tool versus the many specific run_* siblings (e.g., use run_nmap for nmap scans). Lacks when-not-to-use or alternative recommendations.

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