vibekit_exec

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions a prerequisite (app must be running) but fails to disclose that arbitrary shell commands can lead to destructive changes, require proper permissions, or affect the running app. No mention of output format or side effects. For a shell exec tool, this lack of warning is a significant gap.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and contains no filler. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and usage. It is optimally concise.

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?

The description covers the main use cases and prerequisite, but with no output schema, it does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., stdout, stderr, exit code). It also omits error conditions or limitations. For a simple exec tool, this is a moderate gap, making the description functional but not fully 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?

Both parameters in the schema have detailed descriptions, and the schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states the tool's action: 'Run a shell command inside an app's container.' This is specific and distinct from sibling tools like vibekit_app_logs or vibekit_restart_app. The verb 'Run' and resource 'shell command inside an app's container' leave no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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?

It provides clear usage context: 'The app must be running' and 'Useful for inspecting state, running migrations, or debugging.' While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, the guidance is sufficient to distinguish it from other tools like file operations or logs.

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