st.extension.install

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says 'Install' but does not mention side effects such as downloading and executing third-party code, persistence, runtime impact, or whether the operation is reversible. The endpoint reference hints at the mechanism but not the consequences.

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?

A single sentence with no filler, front-loaded with the action and resource, then specifying the method. It earns its place and leaves out only information that belongs in other dimensions.

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 mutating tool with four parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too thin. It does not explain the optional parameters, installation behavior, or what happens after a successful or failed install. An agent could guess the required URL but would not know the effect of `branch`, `global`, or `confirm`.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds 'Git URL' to clarify the `url` parameter, but the optional parameters `branch`, `global`, and `confirm` are completely unexplained. An agent cannot determine what these flags control without external knowledge.

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 ('Install'), a specific resource ('SillyTavern frontend extension'), and the method ('from a Git URL via the ST extension endpoint'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like st.extension.configure, st.extension.set_enabled, st.extension.registry, and st.plugin.install.

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 clearly frames the use case: installing a frontend extension from a Git URL. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the scenario is specific enough that an agent can infer when this tool applies.

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