set_command_timeout

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention what the timeout affects, whether it is persistent, or any side effects. 'Set command timeout' reveals nothing beyond the tool's name.

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 short but under-specified; the single sentence adds no value beyond the tool name. The brevity is not beneficial because it omits essential context.

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?

For a mutation tool with one undocumented parameter, the description is incomplete. It does not clarify what a command timeout is, what units timeout_seconds uses, or what happens when it is set. The output schema does not compensate for this lack of fundamental context.

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 0% and the description does not mention the timeout_seconds parameter at all. It adds no meaning to the bare schema property, leaving units, allowed range, and effect entirely unspecified.

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 is a direct restatement of the tool name with spaces, providing no additional specificity about what the command timeout controls or how it differs from sibling tools. It is a tautology rather than a clarifying statement.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool, when not to use it, or which alternatives might be more appropriate. The description merely states the action without any contextual usage advice.

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