xcode_test

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies test execution, which is a potentially long-running and resource-intensive operation, but does not specify that tests may fail, that results are output to console or logs, or that the tool blocks until completion. The description adds the timeout default 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?

The description is a single, short sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's core action and key parameters. Every word is necessary; there is no fluff.

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 tool's moderate complexity (7 parameters, no output schema), the description is somewhat sparse. It does not address return values, result interpretation, or behavior on failure. However, the sibling tool set suggests testing is a standalone operation, and the description is minimally adequate.

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 value by mentioning the scheme and destination explicitly, and the projectPath parameter includes practical guidance about working directory behavior. The timeoutSeconds description is redundant with the schema, but the overall param info complements the schema well.

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' and the resources 'unit and UI tests', and specifies the parameters 'scheme and destination'. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like xcode_archive, xcode_build, and xcode_test_without_building by focusing on test execution.

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 implies testing a specific scheme and destination, which is clear, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like xcode_test_without_building or xcode_build. There is no guidance on prerequisites or exclusion criteria.

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