Run Script Function

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, but the description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., what side effects occur, authentication needs, rate limits). It does not contradict annotations, but fails to elaborate on the destructive nature beyond what's in structured data.

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, no wasted words, front-loaded with core action. However, could benefit from additional details (e.g., return value, destructive warning) without becoming verbose. Score reflects efficient but slightly under-informative structure.

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 destructive nature (annotations) and complexity (5 params, required fields), the description is insufficient. It should explain return values, error handling, or caution about execution side effects. Output schema exists but description doesn't even mention response format.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all 5 parameters. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate since schema fully documents parameters.

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 'Executes a function in a deployed script' clearly states the verb 'executes' and the resource 'function in a deployed script'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'get_script_content' and 'manage_deployment' which handle different aspects of script management.

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 use this tool vs alternatives. Lacks prerequisites, when-not-to-use, or comparison with similar tools like 'generate_trigger_code' or 'manage_deployment'. The description provides no context for appropriate usage.

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