Run a package action across every host in a fleet

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

Beyond the annotations, it discloses auto-detection of apt/dnf/yum/pacman, the mutation actions, elevation via the host's stored sudo password, and the per-host permission requirement. It does not cover return or partial-failure behavior, but the annotations already indicate a non-read-only operation.

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?

Three concise sentences front-load the core operation, add package-manager behavior, and close with the authorization prerequisite. There is no filler or redundant repetition of the schema.

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 multi-host mutation with no output schema, it covers the operation, package-manager handling, sudo elevation, and access requirement. It omits return/partial-failure details, but it is sufficient for selecting and invoking the action.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It maps the action enum to install/remove/upgrade-all and implies package and fleet ID semantics, but it never explicitly names the id parameter or states which actions require the package field.

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 operation: run a package action across every host in a fleet. It enumerates the action types and package-manager detection, which clearly distinguishes it from the sibling run-command fleet tool.

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 usage for fleet-wide package install/remove/upgrade operations and states a manage-level access prerequisite. However, it does not explicitly contrast with run_command_across_every_host_fleet or provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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