cme_raw

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

No annotations provided. Description only says 'execute a raw command' without disclosing behavioral traits like authentication requirements, potential destructiveness, output format, or error handling. For a raw command tool, 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose then usage. No superfluous words; every sentence adds value.

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?

Despite low complexity (1 param), the tool can execute arbitrary commands. Description fails to explain potential risks, required permissions, success/failure indicators, or result format. No output schema. Completeness is inadequate for safe usage.

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?

Single parameter 'command' with clear description specifying that the 'nxc' or 'crackmapexec' prefix should be omitted. Adds meaning beyond the schema type, compensating for lack of enums or detail. Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline 3 is exceeded.

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?

Clearly states the action (execute a raw command) and resource (NetExec/CrackMapExec command). Explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools by noting it covers advanced operations not handled by others.

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?

Guides when to use: 'for advanced operations not covered by other tools.' Implies that for common tasks, the specialized sibling tools should be used. Lacks explicit 'when not to use' but context is sufficient.

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