vnc_system_command

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

The phrase 'in the background' indicates asynchronous execution, but there is no disclosure of output handling, environment, user privileges, error behavior, or side effects. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and falls short.

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 one clear, front-loaded sentence with no filler words. Every word adds value and it is appropriately sized for the simple schema.

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?

As a shell command execution tool with no annotations or output schema, the description should provide more context about return values, blocking behavior, security implications, or potential side effects. The current description is minimal and incomplete for a potentially dangerous operation.

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 100% with 'command' described as 'The shell command to run'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 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 a specific action (execute a shell command) on a specific resource (the server), which distinguishes it from sibling VNC interaction tools. It is not tautological and adds the detail of running in the background.

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 is provided for when to use this tool vs. alternatives such as vnc_execute_sequence or vnc_launch_gui_app. It does not mention prerequisites, security considerations, or any context for appropriate use.

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