mc_execute_as_op

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the auto-selection behavior and the default env var, but does not mention failure modes (e.g., no online ops, multiple ops without specification), potential side effects, permissions, or output format. Some value added, but significant gaps remain.

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 concise sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the core action, and the second explains the key selection nuance. Information is front-loaded and every word 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?

The tool is simple with full schema coverage, but lacks annotations and an output schema. The description covers the key auto-selection logic but omits failure scenarios and return value expectations. For an execute-command tool, these gaps are noticeable but not critical given the schema richness.

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 100%, and both parameters are already well described in the schema. The tool description largely duplicates the op selection behavior already present in the schema, adding no new semantic meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 executes a command as an online operator, using a specific verb ('execute'), resource ('command'), and role ('online operator'). It distinguishes itself from the sibling mc_execute_command by the operator context and the auto-selection behavior.

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?

Provides a clear decision rule: auto-selects if only one op exists, otherwise requires an explicit op. This gives context for when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it. The operator-specific scope is sufficiently clear from the description and siblings.

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