unity_hub_install_editor

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden. It clearly indicates the tool performs an installation (likely a write operation) and accepts optional modules. It does not mention potential side effects like requiring admin privileges or overwriting existing installations, but given the simple nature of installation, the description is adequate.

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 concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the primary purpose. The first sentence clearly states the core action, and the second adds optional 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?

Given the tool has 2 parameters with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description is complete enough. It covers the main action and optional modules. It could mention that installation may take time or require permissions, but this is implicit.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters ('version' and 'modules'). The description adds the context that modules are 'platform modules' and lists examples (android, ios, webgl, linux, macos, windows-il2cpp), which slightly enhances understanding beyond the schema's generic 'Optional modules to install'.

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 purpose: 'Install a specific Unity Editor version' with specific verb 'Install' and resource 'Unity Editor version'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like unity_hub_available_releases (which lists available versions) and unity_hub_install_modules (which only installs modules).

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 indicates when to use this tool (to install a specific editor version) and optionally include platform modules. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or mention alternatives like unity_hub_install_modules for module-only installation.

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