sysknife_execute

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. It discloses the approval receipt requirement and MCP self-approval limitation, but doesn't detail error behavior, idempotency, or side effects. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with main purpose, zero wasted words. Every sentence earns its place.

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 output schema exists, return values don't need elaboration. One-parameter tool with clear source (sysknife_plan) and approval constraint. Lacks error handling details but otherwise complete for the tool's complexity.

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% (StepToExecute fully defined). Description adds 'take the steps array from sysknife_plan output' – helpful but minimal beyond schema. 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?

Description states 'Execute exact steps produced by sysknife_plan' – specific verb+resource, and clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like sysknife_plan and sysknife_audit_verify.

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 critical usage context: each step needs a one-time receipt from CLI 'sysknife approve', and MCP cannot approve its own mutations. No explicit when-not-to-use, but the approval requirement effectively guides appropriate use.

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