run_python_file

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

No annotations provided; description carries full burden. It mentions headless execution and batch suitability but fails to disclose output/return behavior, side effects, whether it's synchronous, permissions needed, or error handling. Minimal transparency for a file execution tool.

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?

Two sentences are front-loaded with the core action, but the description is too brief, omitting necessary details. Every sentence earns its place but more informative content is needed without becoming verbose.

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 (0%), no annotations, and presence of an output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain parameters, return values, or execution behavior, leaving significant gaps for an agent to correctly use the 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?

Schema has 2 parameters (script_path, timeout_seconds) with 0% schema description coverage. Description adds no explanation or values for these parameters, leaving the agent uninformed about their meaning or constraints.

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?

Description clearly states the tool executes a .py file headlessly via -ExecutePythonScript, specifying verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling execute_python which runs inline code, and mentions it's for long batch jobs.

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 says 'Useful for long batch jobs that shouldn't tie up the interactive editor,' providing explicit usage context and implying when not to use (interactive). Lacks explicit alternatives but sufficiently guides selection among sibling tools.

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