run_snippet

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

No annotations are provided, placing the burden on the description. It discloses return values (output, HTTP response summary, logs) and override capabilities, which is helpful. However, it does not mention potential side effects, required permissions, or whether execution has implications beyond returning data, which is a notable gap for an 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?

The description is a single concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose, then lists optional behaviors without redundancy. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity and leaves no unnecessary wording.

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?

The description specifies return values and optional parameters, which covers the key aspects of a run operation even without an output schema. It could explicitly mention side effects or clarify whether it runs a saved draft versus deployed code, but the current text is largely complete for basic usage.

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?

All six parameters have schema descriptions, so the schema already provides high coverage. The description adds the concept of 'overrides' for method, path, body, and bodyType, and links code to ad-hoc execution, but this is marginal enhancement rather than new semantic meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 runs a snippet and returns output, HTTP response summary, and logs, which is a specific action that distinguishes it from sibling CRUD and deployment tools. The verb 'Run' is direct and the resource 'snippet' is identified, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 implies usage for executing snippets with optional overrides and ad-hoc code, which clearly positions it as the execution tool among sibling CRUD and deployment operations. It does not explicitly contrast with get_snippet or other tools, but the context makes when to use it clear enough.

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