eval_python

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses execution in the main thread (implying potential blocking) and available locals (sublime, window, view, print). However, it does not discuss side effects on the editor state, security implications, or error handling (e.g., stderr not captured). More transparency would be beneficial.

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 very concise: two sentences covering the purpose, execution context, available locals, and output. Every sentence is necessary and 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 the complexity of executing arbitrary code and the absence of an output schema or annotations, the description is somewhat complete but lacks details on return value structure (though 'output' is mentioned), error handling, timeout, and potential side effects. More completeness would improve agent decision-making.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage for the single parameter 'code'. The description adds context by stating the code should be Python with specific locals available, but it does not elaborate on expected format, constraints, or what constitutes valid input. It adds some value beyond the schema but could be more detailed.

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 arbitrary Python in Sublime Text's main thread', specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from all sibling tools, which are file operations, navigation, and other non-code execution tasks.

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 implicitly indicates when to use this tool: when you need to run Python code. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on alternatives or when not to use it (e.g., for simple string operations, other tools might be more appropriate). No sibling tool performs code execution, so no alternative is mentioned.

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