ugs_run_file

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

With no annotations, description fully discloses behavior: safety check in preview mode, token-based confirmation, and server-level enforcement preventing auto-start. Clearly communicates the two-step process.

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?

Compact 4 sentences, front-loaded with primary action, logically structured from main purpose to workflow details. No unnecessary words.

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?

Covers workflow and constraints adequately given output schema exists. Missing details on output format or file size limits, but these are minor given the tool's purpose.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, description explains both parameters: file_path is the G-code file to stream, confirmation_token is obtained from first call. Adds meaning beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states the tool streams a G-code file to the machine, mentioning safety check and two-step process. Distinguishes from siblings like gcode_run_macro and ugs_cancel_job.

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 instructs the agent to call without token first, then user provides token. States Claude cannot self-confirm, providing clear workflow guidance and constraints.

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