robot_run

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the core behavior: running suites and returning JSON with status, failures, and output location. However, it does not mention side effects like writing output artifacts, executing arbitrary test code, or consuming significant time/resources beyond the implied execution.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is concise and places the primary action first, though the brevity contributes to under-specification elsewhere.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value details are not the main burden. Still, the description lacks context for tag filtering, workspace semantics, timeout meaning, and when to choose this over robot_dry_run or robot_parse_results, leaving the definition adequate but incomplete for a six-parameter runner tool.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the six parameters. It only hints at 'selected Robot suites' for paths and 'output location' for output_dir, leaving timeout, workspace, exclude_tags, and include_tags without meaningful explanation.

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 states a specific action ('Run') and resource ('selected Robot suites'), and it names the return payload. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from the sibling robot_dry_run, so an agent must infer that 'run' means actual execution rather than dry-run.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as robot_dry_run, robot_parse_results, or robot_list_tests. The description does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or conditions that would route an agent to a sibling.

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