bakugan_install_m6e_dry_run

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: dry-run mode (no permanent effects), transactional execution (atomicity), and the 'allowed workspace' constraint. Though it doesn't detail side effects or prerequisites, these terms provide meaningful behavioral context beyond the schema.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the action verb 'Run', and contains no filler. Every phrase adds meaning: transactional, installer, dry-run mode, allowed workspace.

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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description should explain return values, prerequisites, and dependency relationships. It does not mention what the tool returns, what makes a workspace 'allowed', or any connection to sibling tools like bakugan_regenerate_m6e_contracts. Significant gaps remain for a 2-param tool.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description only references 'workspace' as the target, leaving 'project' completely unaddressed. No additional meaning is provided for either parameter, such as formats, defaults, or what constitutes an 'allowed workspace'.

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 action (run installer), the mode (dry-run), and the target (allowed workspace). It distinguishes this tool from siblings such as bakugan_regenerate_m6e_contracts and bakugan_analyze_m6e_roster by focusing on the installation process.

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 use for testing the installer without committing changes via the term 'dry-run', but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions. Sibling tools are not mentioned as alternatives.

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