unity_hub_install_modules

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses that the operation installs additional modules, implying a write operation. However, it does not state whether this requires administrative privileges, what happens if a module is already installed, or the expected side effects (e.g., downloading). The behavior is somewhat transparent but lacks detail.

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 that clearly conveys the purpose. It is concise and front-loaded with the action and object. No unnecessary words, but it could be slightly expanded without losing conciseness.

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's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description is mostly complete. However, it lacks details on prerequisites (e.g., editor must be installed), error conditions, and what exactly 'modules' means (are they downloaded? installed from disk?). It adequately covers the main purpose but could be more helpful.

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 description coverage is 100% (both version and modules have descriptions). The description adds 'Install additional platform modules' which aligns with the modules parameter. It mentions 'android, ios, webgl, etc.' which matches the schema's description. However, the description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 installs additional platform modules to an already-installed Unity Editor version. It uses a specific verb ('install') and resource ('platform modules'), and it distinguishes from sibling tools like unity_hub_install_editor (which installs the editor itself) and unity_hub_list_editors (which lists installed editors).

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 adding modules to an existing editor, but it does not explicitly say when to use it vs. alternatives. Sibling tools like unity_hub_install_editor handle full editor installation, and unity_hub_list_editors lists what's installed. The description could better clarify that this tool is only for adding modules post-installation.

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