install_instructionsHow to install a Crucible component into a project: shadcn CLI command, registry config, and npm dependencies.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | Component name, e.g. 'corona' |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavior. It indicates the tool returns informative instructions rather than performing an action, but it does not explicitly state that it is read-only or disclose any side effects, limitations, or prerequisites.
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, focused sentence that packs all relevant information—what the tool does and what it covers—without any wasted words or redundant structure.
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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context about the returned content (CLI command, registry config, dependencies). It also helps differentiate from get_usage, making it complete for the tool's complexity.
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 already fully documents the single 'name' parameter with a clear description and example. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, but with 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 applies.
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 that the tool provides installation instructions for a Crucible component, including shadcn CLI command, registry config, and npm dependencies. It differentiates from sibling tools like get_usage by focusing specifically on installation.
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 implies the tool is for installation guidance, but it does not explicitly state when to use it vs. alternatives or when not to use it. The sibling tool names suggest distinctions, but no direct comparison is given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct step in the registry workflow: search to discover, get_component to fetch source, get_usage to learn integration patterns, and install_instructions for setup. No overlap or ambiguity.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern: search_registry, get_component, get_usage, install_instructions. This makes the tool's purpose immediately clear from its name.
Four tools is well-scoped for a registry server covering discovery, source retrieval, usage guidance, and installation. Each tool earns its place without redundancy or bloat.
The tool surface covers the complete workflow an agent needs: finding a component, fetching its source, understanding how to use it, and installing it. No obvious gaps for the stated domain.