run-powershell-script

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool runs a script and returns output, but lacks critical details: execution context (e.g., local vs. remote, permissions needed), error handling, timeout behavior, or security implications. This is inadequate for a tool that executes arbitrary code.

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—a single sentence with zero waste. It's front-loaded with the core action and outcome, making it easy to parse quickly without unnecessary elaboration.

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 complexity of executing PowerShell scripts (potential for side effects, security risks) and the absence of annotations and output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain return values, error conditions, or execution environment, leaving significant gaps for safe and effective use.

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%, with the single parameter 'script' fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as script format examples or constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema handles parameter documentation.

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 ('Runs') and resource ('a PowerShell script'), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get-powershell-documentation' or other execution tools, which would require specifying unique aspects like execution environment or script type.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools available (e.g., for item management, security, or other operations), there's no indication of prerequisites, appropriate contexts, or exclusions, leaving the agent to guess based on tool names alone.

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