execute_capture_plan

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

Annotations already mark this as destructive and non-idempotent, but the description adds valuable context beyond them: the token is single-use and the tool executes with side effects. It still does not specify exactly what side effects occur, but the added single-use behavior exceeds what annotations alone provide.

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 one compact sentence that front-loads the action and the side-effect warning. There is no wasted wording, though 'one current plan' is slightly ambiguous.

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?

There is an output schema, and annotations cover the destructive/non-idempotent safety profile. However, for a destructive action with undocumented parameters, the description under-specifies exactly what effects occur and what expected_plan_id is used for, making it only minimally complete.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the 2 parameters. It gives plan_token a meaningful single-use semantic, but expected_plan_id is never mentioned, leaving its role and relationship to plan_token entirely inferred.

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 ('Run') and resource ('one current plan'), and the 'token is single-use, then get_run' wording helps distinguish this one-shot execution tool from sibling capture/planning tools. However, it does not explicitly name or contrast any sibling, so it stops short of a 5.

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 phrase 'then get_run' implies this is the one-shot execution step followed by run retrieval, and 'single-use' implies the token should not be reused. There is no explicit guidance about when to choose this over start_detached_capture or plan_capture, and no exclusions are stated.

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