copilot_command

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says it runs a command and how to format args, but does not mention potential side effects, output behavior, execution context, or safety implications of executing arbitrary Copilot commands.

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 two sentences with no redundant information. It leads with the purpose ('Run a general Copilot command') and then provides the essential usage detail about args.

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?

This tool executes arbitrary Copilot commands, yet the description is minimal. It does not explain how output is returned, how errors or timeouts are handled, or how `cwd` affects execution. The output schema exists but the description lacks enough detail to fully understand the tool's behavior in context.

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?

The description adds meaningful semantics for the `args` parameter by explaining its format, but it does not describe `cwd` or `timeout_seconds`. With 0% schema description coverage, the description only compensates for one of three parameters, leaving the other two to be inferred from their names and defaults.

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 'Run a general Copilot command' with a specific verb and resource, and the guidance to use args exactly like the shell command after `copilot` distinguishes this tool from the sibling `copilot_prompt` by framing it as a CLI command runner.

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 gives a usage instruction for args format ('Use args exactly like the shell command after `copilot`'), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus the alternative `copilot_prompt` or mention any exclusions. The usage context is implied rather than explicitly contrasted with alternatives.

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