install_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It discloses that status comes from containers and that unrecognized apps are not known, which is useful. However, it does not explain possible status values, failure modes, or whether the operation is purely read-only, leaving gaps for an agent.

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 two sentences and every sentence earns its place: the first states the core function, the second clarifies scope and edge behavior. It is concise and front-loaded, though the second sentence is slightly awkwardly phrased.

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 single-parameter status tool with no output schema, the description gives enough context: what is checked, where the data comes from, and when the app may be unknown. It could be more complete by describing the response format, but the basic usage and behavior are adequately covered.

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 only describes 'app' as 'App name', but the description adds meaning by clarifying the app must be one installed by homebutler. This helps the agent understand valid parameter values and what happens for unknown apps, going beyond the bare schema definition.

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 states a specific verb ('Check'), a resource ('status of an installed app'), and a data source ('as its containers report it'). It further differentiates from install_list and similar siblings by explicitly limiting scope to apps homebutler installed. This leaves no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 when to use this tool: for installed apps known to homebutler, not for arbitrary containers. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives such as docker_inspect or install_list, nor does it state when not to use it beyond the scope restriction. The usage guidance is mostly implicit.

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