provider_admin_run

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by disclosing that output is 'redacted' and that mutating operations are rejected, providing extra behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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, concise sentence that conveys the essential purpose and constraints without any unnecessary words or repetition.

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 simplicity (executes a CLI command with no output schema), the description covers the key aspects: purpose, source of operations, read-only constraint, and redacted output. It lacks explicit error behavior or format details, but is largely sufficient for agent invocation.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds context by noting that operationId comes from provider_admin_list, which clarifies the source of valid values beyond the schema's description.

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 'Execute a READ-ONLY provider CLI admin operation,' specifying the verb (execute), resource (provider CLI admin operation), and scope (read-only, sourced from provider_admin_list). It also distinguishes from the sibling tool provider_admin_mutate by explicitly rejecting mutating operations.

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 indicates that the tool executes read-only operations and rejects mutating ones, which implicitly guides the agent to use it for administrative reads. However, it does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool or name alternatives beyond the sibling context.

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