terminal

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

Discloses return format, unrestricted privileges, no sandboxing, shell differences (Windows cmd.exe, Unix bash), timeouts (120s default, 600s max), and background task management. Could add explicit warning about destructive potential, but overall strong.

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?

Concise yet comprehensive; each sentence adds unique information. Front-loaded with core purpose, then progressively details. No redundant or filler content.

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 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers purpose, usage, behavior, return format, timeouts, background tasks, cross-platform, and alternatives. Highly complete.

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% (baseline 3). Description adds value by grouping background-related params (bg_status, bg_kill, bg_list) and clarifying timeout defaults and max, beyond schema descriptions.

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 'Execute shell commands' and enumerates specific use cases (git, npm, pip). It distinguishes from siblings by advising 'For file ops prefer fs; for Python prefer python_exec.'

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?

Explicitly lists when to use ('Use for: git, npm, pip, system commands, anything requiring shell') and provides exclusions ('For file ops prefer fs; for Python prefer python_exec'). Also warns of unrestricted nature.

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