raw_request

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It explains path construction but fails to disclose potential side effects (e.g., destructive methods like DELETE), authentication requirements, or error behavior. This is a notable gap for a tool that can execute arbitrary API calls.

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 only a few lines, front-loads the key phrase 'escape hatch', and uses two examples to illustrate usage. Every sentence earns its place with no wasted words.

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 low schema coverage and no annotations, the description provides essential info (base URL, path formation, examples) but omits safety warnings and any guidance on the ambiguous 'params' field. An output schema exists, so return values are handled, but the description could be more complete for a raw request tool.

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?

The description clarifies that 'path' must include a leading slash and shows examples with 'method' and 'body', but it does not explain the 'params' parameter at all. With 0% schema coverage, this leaves one of four parameters undocumented, though path and body are partially explained.

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 this is an 'escape hatch' for REST endpoints not covered by other tools, with the path appended to a base URL. It distinguishes from siblings by being the catch-all raw request tool, and includes concrete examples.

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 says to use when an endpoint is 'not covered by other tools', implying preference for more specific tools. Provides examples for GET and POST, demonstrating how to invoke it.

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