drozer_run_raw

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose potential behavioral impacts such as destructive actions, authentication requirements, or rate limits. The statement 'run any Drozer command' implies versatility but lacks specifics on safety or side effects.

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 extremely concise: two sentences and an example. Every part is purposeful and front-loaded with the core action.

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?

As an escape hatch tool, the description is adequate but could be more complete. It does not explain return values or error behavior, but an output schema exists (not shown). Given the complexity and coverage, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 meaning to the 'command' parameter via an example, but the 'timeout_s' parameter is not mentioned. With 0% schema description coverage, the description partially compensates but leaves the second parameter undocumented.

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 that the tool runs any Drozer command verbatim, serving as an escape hatch for unwrapped modules. This distinguishes it from sibling tools which wrap specific Drozer functions.

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 explicitly mentions the tool is an 'escape hatch for modules not yet wrapped,' indicating when to use it. It does not specify when not to use or provide alternatives, but the context of sibling tools implies the specific modules are preferred.

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