Execute and wait for output (script or template)

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds 'one-shot helper' and polling behavior, but misses key traits like the required confirm parameter, default dry_run preview, and potential destructive side effects. The term 'terminal' is ambiguous, and 'filtered output' is undefined.

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?

Single sentence with 16 words, front-loaded. Every word serves a purpose. However, 'terminal' is ambiguous and could be clearer (e.g., 'completion' or 'termination').

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?

Despite output schema and annotations, the description is too minimal for a complex tool with 14 parameters and many sibling tools. It omits essential context about confirm, dry_run, timeout, and endpoint targeting, making it insufficient for reliable agent selection and invocation.

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 parameter descriptions. The description adds context about auto-routing for script mode, largely repeating the schema. It does not explain confirm, dry_run, or other parameters beyond their schema descriptions. The overall workflow linking parameters is implied but not explicit.

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 the tool starts an action (script or template), polls until completion, and returns filtered output. The verb 'starts' and 'polls' specify the action and behavior. It distinguishes from sibling tools like run_script by emphasizing polling and combined script/template support, though not explicitly contrasting.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like run_script, run_powershell, or wait_for_automation. The description does not mention prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer context without clear direction.

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