Execute operation

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description explains automatic undo grouping, argument validation, batch.run counting as one call, and response including ambient context. It also warns against calling app.beginUndoGroup/endUndoGroup, providing useful behavioral context.

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 dense but well-structured, front-loading the core purpose and then adding batching, undo, and response context. It is not overly verbose given the complexity, though the example and multiple caveats make it slightly long.

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 generic executor with no output schema, the description covers usage, validation, undo behavior, batching, and response context. It gives enough detail for an agent to invoke correctly and understand what to expect, and it correctly defers operation-specific details to ae_catalog.

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%, but the description adds value by explaining that args are validated against the operation's declared parameters and provides a full example. It also clarifies the effect of timeoutMs for long operations, adding semantics beyond the schema.

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 'Execute an atomic operation by name (from ae_catalog)' with a concrete example. It distinguishes ae_do as the generic executor versus the specific sibling tools, and even provides an example call showing operation and args.

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?

Explicit guidance is given: 'Have more than one operation to run? Wrap them in ONE batch.run instead of several ae_do calls' and also mentions that read/verify steps can ride in the same batch. This clearly indicates when to use alternatives.

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