icp_install_asset_wasm

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'install' without any side effects, permission requirements, or whether the WASM is downloaded automatically (though the param description does mention downloading). This leaves the agent unaware of what happens when the tool is invoked.

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 short sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core action and immediately provides an important prerequisite, making it highly efficient.

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?

The description gives a clear purpose and prerequisite, and the schema documents both parameters. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it lacks behavioral details like return behavior or side effects, making it only moderately complete for a straightforward setup step.

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%, with both parameters well-described in the schema ('Path to asset canister WASM (downloads official if not provided)' and 'Target canister Principal ID'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the certified asset canister WASM, using a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes this tool from general code installation (like icp_install_code) and ties it to the frontend deployment workflow with 'Required before deploying frontend files.'

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 says this is required before deploying frontend files, providing clear contextual guidance on when to use it. It does not mention alternatives or exclusions, but the prerequisite relationship is sufficient to orient the agent in a deployment workflow.

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