Prepare or Run Arma Reforger Workbench

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

Annotations exist but are neutral (no readOnly, destructive hints). The description adds 'launch without a shell' but doesn't clarify side effects, permissions, or execution behavior. For a tool that can launch executables, more behavioral context is needed.

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 (one English, one German) are brief, but the repetition of the same information in two languages is wasteful. It is structured but lacks useful content that 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 6 parameters, a nested object, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, the description is severely incomplete. It does not cover return values, error cases, or parameter relationships, leaving the agent with little to act on.

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 provides no explanation of any of the 6 parameters. The agent must guess from names like 'pluginArguments' or 'autoClose'. No example values or context for the nested object or enum values.

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 states the tool builds a Workbench command and optionally launches it, using clear verbs and resource. The title adds 'Prepare or Run Arma Reforger Workbench', making the purpose specific. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_projects or server_status, which are about listing or inspecting, not building commands.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. No mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or context. The description only states what it does, not when or why.

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