octane_run_oneshot_bridge

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions running a Lua script via AppleScript and draining a queue, but does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., destructive nature), authentication needs, rate limits, or what happens to the queue items. The agent lacks critical behavioral details.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the main action and purpose. It avoids verbosity, but could provide more information without becoming overly long. Every word earns its place, but it lacks parameter and behavioral details.

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 the tool's complexity (draining batch queues via AppleScript/Lua) and the presence of a non-trivial output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain prerequisites, output behavior, or potential impact on the system. Agent needs more to use effectively.

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%, meaning the parameters lack descriptions in the schema. The tool description does not mention the two parameters ('dry_run' and 'timeout_seconds') at all, providing no guidance on their meaning or usage. This is a significant gap.

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 action ('Run'), the specific resource ('hermes_bridge_oneshot.generated.lua'), the method ('via AppleScript'), and the purpose ('for batch queue draining'). It effectively distinguishes from the sibling 'octane_run_bridge' by specifying it's a oneshot operation.

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 the tool's usage scenario: 'for batch queue draining'. This provides clear context for when to use it, though it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use. The sibling 'octane_run_bridge' exists, but the description gives enough implication.

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