cst_runtime_describe_tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral-disclosure burden. It does not confirm read-only behavior, mention runtime/connection requirements, or describe error conditions when a command name is invalid.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. However, it is extremely terse and lacks enough structure to guide invocation.

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 tool with one required parameter, no annotations, and 0% schema coverage, the description should at least explain where tool_name comes from and how it relates to sibling runtime tools. It omits these details, leaving key invocation context 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 description coverage is 0%; the single required parameter 'tool_name' has no schema description. The description only implies that tool_name identifies a runtime command, without stating format or where to obtain valid names, so it does not compensate for the coverage gap.

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 a specific verb, 'Describe', and resource, 'one runtime command'. However, it does not differentiate this tool from siblings such as cst_runtime_list_tools_tool, cst_runtime_usage_guide_tool, or cst_toolbox_describe_tool, and 'runtime command' remains broad.

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 provides no when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives. It does not say whether it should be called after listing runtime tools or before invoking one.

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