Execute slash commands like /init or /undo within a target OpenCode session to trigger workflows and manage session state.
Execute a slash command in a session (e.g. /init, /undo).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| agent | No | ||
| command | Yes | ||
| modelID | No | ||
| variant | No | ||
| arguments | No | ||
| directory | No | Project directory to target. Optional; defaults to the server default project. | |
| sessionId | Yes | ||
| providerID | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v3.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It says only that a command is executed; it does not disclose whether commands like /init or /undo mutate session state, what permissions are required, whether effects are reversible, or what the tool returns. The examples hint at action but not at consequences.
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 single sentence is front-loaded with the verb and resource, contains no filler, and the examples are useful. It is efficient, though its extreme brevity leaves substantive gaps that belong to other dimensions.
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 an 8-parameter action tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is largely incomplete. It establishes purpose but omits parameter meaning, behavioral effects, prerequisites, and how to choose this over adjacent session, shell, or command-list tools.
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 only 13%, so the description must compensate for six undocumented parameters (agent, modelID, variant, arguments, providerID, and command itself). It only implicitly covers sessionId and command ('in a session') with no syntax, format, or role for the remaining arguments.
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 gives a specific verb ('Execute') and resource ('a slash command in a session'), with examples (/init, /undo) that clarify the kind of command. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from close siblings such as opencode_command_list or opencode_tui_execute_command, but the session-scoped slash-command framing is clear enough.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like opencode_command_list (to discover commands), opencode_shell_execute, or opencode_tui_execute_command. The examples imply a class of commands but provide no conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.