Show package info

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only says to run an external command. It does not mention that the tool wraps an executable, may require a game tag to avoid a blocking GUI dialog, or what happens on failure. The description adds no transparency beyond the command itself.

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 front-loads the command and core output. Every word earns its place, with no extraneous detail.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain return values and behavioral context. It only mentions 'name table, export table' but does not describe output format, error handling, or the critical game tag requirement that the schema highlights. The tool is more complex than the description conveys.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description only references the <package> placeholder and adds no meaning beyond the schema. It does not clarify parameter interactions or the JSON option, but the schema already covers those adequately.

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 runs 'umodel -pkginfo <package>' to display a package summary including name table and export table. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like umodel_list_packages or umodel_list_objects.

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 usage: use this to show package info. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives or state any exclusions, so guidance is minimal but not misleading.

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