cst_sweep_run_tool

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that one copied project is created per case and that solve/export are optional, but it does not explain overwrite behavior, error handling, cleanup, output side effects, permissions, or what happens to the original project.

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 filler. It leads with the verb and resource, then compactly lists key mechanics. For a concise summary, it wastes nothing.

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 12-parameter operation with no annotations, 0% schema description coverage, and a sibling preview tool, the description is far too thin. While an output schema exists and return values need not be explained, the description does not provide enough context for correct selection or invocation.

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% across 12 parameters, including a nested 'parameters' object. The description only vaguely references 'parameters applied' and optional solve/export, leaving mode, max_cases, overwrite, output_dir, close_after_case, continue_on_error, result_max_points, and result_tree_paths entirely unexplained.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Run a parameter sweep.' It also clarifies the basic mechanism ('one copied project per case') and optional steps. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from the sibling 'cst_sweep_preview_tool' or explain the preview-versus-run distinction.

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 says what running a sweep entails but gives no guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives, especially the sibling preview tool. There are no prerequisites, warnings, or recommended workflows provided.

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