as_sdk_install

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true) are well-provided. The description adds value by noting the 'confirmation_required' return case, which clarifies the need for the confirm parameter and the possibility of a two-step interaction.

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 concise: two sentences plus an args/returns list. Every sentence earns its place, with no wasted words. The structure is front-loaded with the purpose and then parameter details.

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?

Given the moderate complexity of installing SDK packages, the description plus annotations and return info provide sufficient context. The output schema exists (returns string), and idempotentHint indicates safe retries. Minor gap: no mention of underlying sdkmanager, but not essential.

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 input schema already contains detailed descriptions for all sub-parameters (packages with examples, confirm with 'Must be true', timeout with defaults). The main description summarizes these but adds marginal new information. Schema coverage is effectively high despite context signal indicating 0%, so baseline 3 is exceeded.

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 one or more Android SDK packages, including downloading and accepting licenses. This verb+resource combination distinguishes it from siblings like as_sdk_list and as_sdk_accept_licenses.

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 installing SDK packages but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or provide when-not-to-use guidance. The usage context is clear from the purpose but lacks explicit alternatives or exclusions.

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