unity_packages_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It correctly indicates a non-destructive read operation ('Get detailed info'). However, it lacks details on response structure, potential errors, or any additional behavioral traits beyond the basic read nature.

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 concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the purpose and includes key output elements ('versions and dependencies').

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?

While the description mentions 'detailed info', it is vague about what exactly is returned (e.g., metadata besides versions and dependencies). Given the absence of an output schema, more specificity would help. The description is adequate but not complete.

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 provides clear descriptions for both parameters (name with example, port with usage note). The tool description does not add new semantic information beyond what the schema offers. With 100% schema coverage, 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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'detailed info about an installed package', explicitly mentioning 'versions and dependencies'. This distinguishes it from siblings like unity_packages_list (which lists packages) and unity_packages_search (which searches for packages).

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 used when needing detailed package information, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like unity_packages_list or unity_packages_search. No exclusions or context are given.

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