Wywolaj dowolna operacje Forge API

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

The description says the tool can execute any of 273 operations, which includes destructive Forge API operations, yet the annotations claim destructiveHint=false. This is a direct contradiction. The description also gives no warning about side effects, permissions, or the risk of mutation/deletion.

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 short sentences each serve a distinct purpose: what the tool does, how to discover operations, and how the organization parameter is resolved. There is no filler or redundancy.

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 core invocation flow is covered: operationId, search tool, and organization fallback are all mentioned. However, for a generic executor of 273 operations with no output schema, the description omits safety guidance, return-shape expectations, and when to prefer dedicated sibling tools, especially given the destructiveHint contradiction.

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 already documents all five parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful value by revealing that a missing {organization} path parameter is injected from server configuration, and by connecting operationId to the forge_search_operations workflow.

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 that the tool executes any of 273 Laravel Forge API operations by operationId, making the generic dispatch purpose unmistakable. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the specific sibling tools, but the 'any of 273' scope and the pointer to forge_search_operations make it distinguishable.

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 tells the agent how to find the right operationId using forge_search_operations and explains that the missing {organization} path parameter is auto-filled from server configuration. It does not explicitly say when to prefer the specific sibling tools, so it stops short of full exclusion guidance.

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