Execute a command with elevated privileges via pkexec, specifying target user (default root) and timeout to safely perform administrative tasks.
Execute a command with elevated privileges using pkexec CLI escalation.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| user | No | Target user (default 'root'). | root |
| command | Yes | Command string to execute. | |
| timeout_seconds | No | Timeout in seconds. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It only mentions privilege escalation and pkexec, but does not disclose potential interactive authentication prompts, environment changes, side effects, failure modes, or output behavior. This is a privileged execution tool, so these missing details are significant.
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 with no filler, and the key differentiator ('elevated privileges') is front-loaded. Every word contributes to the definition.
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?
For a privileged command-execution tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is underspecified. It fails to address authentication behavior, security implications, command execution semantics, timeout behavior, or return values, leaving an agent without enough context to use it safely and correctly.
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 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters including defaults. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides; baseline 3 is appropriate.
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?
States a specific action ('Execute a command') with a clear qualifier ('with elevated privileges') and mechanism ('pkexec CLI escalation'). This distinguishes it from run_command and from other polkit_* tools that manage policies, rules, or authentication rather than executing commands.
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?
No guidance on when to prefer this tool over run_command or other polkit tools. The elevated-privilege qualifier implies the use case, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-routing information.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.