install_extension

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

Annotations indicate the tool is not read-only and not destructive, and the description confirms it is a mutation action. However, it adds no additional behavioral details such as idempotency, error conditions, or side effects, relying heavily on annotations.

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 extremely concise, comprising two short sentences. Every word adds value, with the action stated first followed by necessary prerequisites.

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 lack of an output schema, the description should hint at the response (e.g., success indicator). It also omits mention of the debug parameter and any potential errors. While it covers the basic action and dependencies, completeness is adequate but not thorough.

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 descriptions already cover all parameters (100% coverage). The description adds value by linking blockId and pageId to their source tools, but does not elaborate on name or debug beyond the schema.

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 an extension onto a dashboard page. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_extension and create_extension_dashboard by specifying the required source IDs, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly mentions that the tool requires a block ID from create_extension and a page ID from create_extension_dashboard, providing clear prerequisite context. However, it does not include when not to use the tool or alternatives, slightly limiting guidance.

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