Install ffmpeg

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool can run package-manager commands and that dry-run is default, implying no changes unless execute is true. However, it does not cover potential side effects, permissions, or error handling, which are relevant for a command-executing tool.

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?

Two concise sentences: first states the main action (return or run commands), second explains the default and parameter. No fluff, every word adds value. The description is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior. It mentions detection of install commands and execution. Missing details about return format or error handling, but overall adequate for the tool's simplicity.

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% (the parameter is well-documented in the schema). The description adds the term 'dry-run' but essentially restates the schema's info. No new semantic value beyond what the schema provides, so score is baseline 3.

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 returns or runs detected ffmpeg install commands. It specifies the default dry-run behavior and the parameter to execute. This distinguishes it from siblings like video.check_ffmpeg (checking) and video.cleanup/extract_scenes.

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 clear context: dry-run by default, and use 'execute: true' to actually run commands. It does not explicitly exclude other scenarios, but the usage is straightforward given the single boolean parameter. Sibling context helps differentiate use cases.

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