start_ec2_smoke_run

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions starting and terminating the instance, implying a destructive lifecycle and paid nature, but fails to disclose other behavioral traits such as blocking behavior, AWS credential requirements, cost implications, or potential side effects.

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 concise sentence with no fluff. However, it is under-specified for the tool's complexity; conciseness is not a virtue when critical details are omitted.

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 9 parameters with no descriptions, no annotations, and an output schema not detailed, the description is severely incomplete. It does not define 'smoke run', explain required confirmation_token, or indicate return values, leaving agents with insufficient information to use the tool correctly.

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%, yet the tool description does not explain any of the 9 parameters (e.g., local_path, run_name, confirmation_token). The description adds no value beyond the schema names, leaving agents uninformed about 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'start' and the resource 'EC2+SSM smoke run', and adds the important behavior of terminating after completion. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from the sibling 'start_ec2_smoke_run_async' or clarify synchronous vs async nature.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'plan_ec2_smoke_run' or 'start_ec2_smoke_run_async'. No prerequisites, contexts, or when-not-to-use information is given.

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