tools_run

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the output is a URL but does not disclose whether the tool mutates data, requires special permissions, or has side effects. As an execution tool, it should clarify if it's destructive or read-only, which is missing.

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 one sentence, making it concise and front-loaded. It communicates two key facts: execution and output format. However, it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness, hence a 4.

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 lack of output schema, the description should elaborate on the return value (e.g., URL format, error handling, or report nature). It only states 'shareable interactive HTML report URL' without further detail, leaving gaps for an agent needing to interpret results.

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 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides (tool_name and taskList). It does not explain nested structure or constraints, but the schema is sufficient.

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 the tool executes an analysis tool and returns a shareable interactive HTML report URL. It uses a specific verb ('Execute') and identifies the resource ('analysis tool'), making the purpose clear. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like tools_info or tools_schema, preventing a 5.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention when not to use it or any prerequisites. For example, it doesn't compare with module_request or tools_schema, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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