pro_live_execute

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it runs in a live session, requires cowork mode, variables persist between calls, and warns about destabilizing Pro. It also explains error handling (exact one-liner pasting). This is comprehensive for a non-annotated tool.

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 relatively long but well-structured with clear sections. It front-loads the main purpose and then provides necessary details. Every sentence adds value, though it could be slightly more concise without losing information.

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 complexity (3 parameters, no annotations, output schema exists), the description covers most aspects: purpose, usage guidelines, behavioral traits, and parameter semantics. It lacks explicit description of the timeout parameter and return values, but overall it is quite complete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the 'action' parameter usefully (human label for activity log) and implies 'code' is Python code. However, 'timeout_seconds' is not explicitly described. Despite this, the description adds significant value beyond the 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?

Description clearly states that the tool executes Python inside the currently open ArcGIS Pro application, differentiating it from arcpy_execute. It explicitly mentions key capabilities like accessing arcpy.mp.ArcGISProject('CURRENT') and immediate layer appearance, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly contrasts with the sibling tool arcpy_execute (headless vs live), provides caution about avoiding rapid view/camera manipulation, and includes house rules (e.g., don't create new .aprx files unless asked). This offers clear guidance on when and how to use the tool.

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