flipper_cli

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a key behavioral trait: streaming commands will be cut off at the timeout, and that output is text-based. However, it does not warn about potentially destructive commands that could be run via 'any' CLI command, which is a notable omission for a generic command executor.

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 well-structured with a clear first sentence, useful examples, and a critical caveat. It is slightly longer than necessary due to the list of examples, but every element adds value. The information is front-loaded with the main purpose and then the important exclusion.

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?

As a generic tool with no annotations and no visible output schema, the description does a good job covering the main behavior, output format, timeout caveat, and relationship to a key sibling. It does not mention connection prerequisites or error handling, but given the tool's broad scope and the presence of dedicated sibling tools for many specific functions, this is a minor gap. The description is complete enough for effective tool selection.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning to the 'command' parameter through numerous examples, but the 'timeout_seconds' parameter is only implied via the phrase 'cut off at the timeout' and is never explicitly explained in terms of units, effect, or configuration. The schema's default and title help, but the description leaves the timeout parameter's semantics partially inferred.

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 the tool's function with a specific verb+resource: 'Run any Flipper CLI command and return its text output.' It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by naming flipper_cli_stream as the alternative for streaming commands, and provides concrete examples that illustrate the range of commands it can execute.

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 gives explicit usage guidance: it provides multiple examples of appropriate commands, and explicitly states when not to use the tool ('Streaming commands ... use flipper_cli_stream for those instead'). This is a clear when/when-not with a named alternative, satisfying the highest bar.

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