run_xcrun

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It only states the action without disclosing potential side effects, safety concerns, output behavior, or error handling. For a tool that executes arbitrary commands, this is a significant gap.

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?

A single sentence with no filler, front-loading the core action. It is appropriately concise, though it could be expanded with caveats while remaining succinct.

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?

For a simple 3-parameter tool, the description is incomplete because it lacks context on command execution semantics, such as how args are passed, working directory behavior, or potential risks. Given the power of this tool, more context is needed.

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 input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 verb 'Executes' and the resource 'a specified Xcode tool via xcrun', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like build_project or run_tests. However, it could be more explicit that it is a generic wrapper for any xcrun tool, but the name reinforces this.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it should be used for invoking Xcode command-line tools that lack dedicated wrappers, nor does it specify any exclusions or prerequisites.

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