sandbox_keep_alive

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the non-destructive action (extending timeout) but omits details like whether the sandbox must be running, if the new timeout resets a timer, or what happens on failure. The description provides minimal transparency beyond the basic action.

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, clear sentence that conveys all necessary purpose information with no wasted words. It is appropriately concise and front-loaded.

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 tool has a simple input schema (2 simple params) and no output schema, making it relatively uncomplex. The description is adequate for the basic functionality but could be more complete by mentioning what the response indicates (e.g., new expiry time).

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add any meaning beyond what the schema already provides for the two parameters (sandboxId and timeoutMs).

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 uses a specific verb ('extend') and resource ('sandbox timeout'), and clearly explains the purpose: to prevent automatic termination. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like sandbox_kill (which terminates) and sandbox_info (which queries state).

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 a usage context (preventing timeout), but provides no explicit guidance on when to use vs. alternatives like sandbox_create or sandbox_resume, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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