Execute Box command

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

The description goes beyond annotations by detailing specific side effects: 'may modify files, install software, access configured credentials, or affect external systems'. It also discloses the 60-second wait behavior. Annotations already label it destructive/open-world, but the description adds concrete context, significantly enhancing transparency.

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?

Two sentences, both earning their place. The first states the core action and timeout; the second warns of side effects and points to an alternative. No fluff, front-loaded with the primary purpose.

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 description covers purpose, side effects, and alternative, but lacks parameter semantics (cwd, timeout) and return-value expectations. No output schema exists, so the 0% parameter coverage leaves gaps. It's adequate for deciding whether to use the tool, but not fully complete for correct invocation without schema inspection.

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%, so the description must compensate. It implicitly indicates 'command' is the shell command and 'box_id' is the Box, but gives no explanation for 'cwd' or 'timeout_seconds'. The timeout is implied by 'wait up to 60 seconds' but not tied to the parameter. Parameter meanings are largely left to inference.

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 'Run a shell command inside a Box and wait up to 60 seconds' — a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tool box_job_start by noting the alternative for longer work, making its purpose unmistakable.

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 'Use box_job_start for longer work', providing a direct when-not-to-use and naming the alternative. The description also implies this is for short-to-medium commands (wait up to 60 seconds), giving clear context.

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