app_install

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It does mention an approval requirement, hinting at authorization needs, but it does not explain side effects, permissions, the destructive nature of installation, or what 'allowed host root' means.

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 short sentence, making it concise in length. However, the unclear phrase 'under an allowed host root' introduces confusion, and the sentence omits critical parameter and usage details, earning it an average score.

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 annotations, no output schema, and no parameter documentation, the description leaves major gaps about return values, prerequisites, and operational semantics. For a tool that installs APKs—a significant mutating action—the description is severely under-specified.

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 has no parameter descriptions (coverage 0%), and the description does not explain the parameters path, replace, or approved. The meaning of path is only vaguely implied by 'APK,' and approved by 'Approval-required,' but replace is completely undocumented, leaving agents uncertain about how to set these fields.

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 action 'installation of an APK,' which distinguishes it from sibling tools like app_launch and app_stop. However, the phrase 'under an allowed host root' is ambiguous and may confuse the agent about the target environment or prerequisites.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as app_launch or app_stop. It mentions 'Approval-required' but does not specify conditions for use, exclusions, or alternative tools.

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