python_test

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It mentions coverage reporting and test selection but fails to describe behavior like exit codes, side effects (e.g., file generation), or error handling. The description provides basic behavioral intent but lacks depth.

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?

Single sentence efficiently conveys purpose and key features. It is front-loaded. Could be structured with bullet points for clarity, but current length is appropriate.

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?

With 8 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is too brief. It covers the main purpose but omits details on return values, error handling, or integration with other tools (e.g., how coverage reports are handled). Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no extra detail beyond summarizing features that map to parameters (coverage, markers). No elaboration on parameter usage or defaults beyond schema.

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 (Run), resource (Python tests), and tool (pytest) with specific features (coverage reporting, test selection). It distinguishes from siblings like nodejs_test and go_test by specifying Python and pytest.

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 implicitly indicates use for Python pytest tests, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like run_tests or when not to use it. No exclusions or alternatives mentioned.

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