cli_execute

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

Annotations provide basic traits (not read-only, open-world, not idempotent, not destructive). The description adds valuable behavioral context: automatic retry, circuit breaker, and fallback. These are critical for agent decision-making and go beyond annotations.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and key features. No redundant or filler words.

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 covers core purpose and key behaviors but does not elaborate on return values, error handling details, or potential side effects (given openWorldHint=true). With no output schema, some additional context would help.

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% with descriptions for all 6 parameters. The description does not add parameter-specific details beyond what the schema already provides, so 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 uses a specific verb 'Execute' and resource 'CLI', listing the three supported providers (Claude, Gemini, Codex). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools (cli_stats, cli_list, cli_route) by focusing on task execution.

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 tasks on a CLI but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to siblings or alternatives. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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