trpc_raw

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

Discloses that reads may return sensitive data (env vars/secrets) and that mutations bypass protections of curated tools. Clearly states default behavior (read) and mutation requirements. No annotations exist, so description fully carries the burden.

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?

Description is a single paragraph that efficiently conveys purpose, usage, and warnings. Could be structured with bullet points but is not overly verbose. Key information is front-loaded.

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 generic nature of the tool (raw tRPC calls) and no output schema, the description adequately explains behavior, default mode, and safety warnings. Return values are not described as they depend on the specific procedure, which is acceptable.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by providing usage examples and reinforcing the confirm requirement, though it largely mirrors schema descriptions. A slight bump for safety emphasis.

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 it calls any tRPC procedure not covered by dedicated tools, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying 'não coberta pelas tools dedicadas'.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use examples (traefik.*, branding.*, etc.) and when-not-to-use (use dedicated tools if available). Includes instruction for read vs write operations and the required confirm field for mutations.

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