invoke_tool

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

Annotations provide only readOnlyHint=false. The description adds that arguments are validated before running, which is useful behavioral context. It does not disclose auth needs, rate limits, error handling, or that the invoked tool's effects determine whether the operation is destructive, so it remains a partial disclosure.

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?

Three concise sentences, each earning its place: purpose, validation behavior, and usage condition. The core instruction is front-loaded.

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 meta-tool with no output schema and only readOnlyHint=false, the description provides adequate guidance: what it does, how to discover names, and when to use it. It could briefly state that execution behavior and errors come from the invoked tool, but nothing critical to correct invocation is missing.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters, including 'Exact tool name (from search_tools)' and 'Arguments object matching the tool's input schema'. The description repeats the search_tools discovery path but adds no syntax, format, or example beyond the schema.

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 exactly what it does: run any WebCake tool by exact name with arguments. It distinguishes itself from search_tools by routing discovery there, and from natively loaded siblings by targeting tools 'not loaded natively'.

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?

Explicitly says to use it for tools not loaded natively and directs discovery to search_tools. This gives a clear when-to-use condition and an alternative for the discovery step.

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