open_package_install_ui

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

The description adds that the action occurs in the active editor, which is a behavioral constraint beyond annotations (which are all false). However, it does not disclose whether the tool waits for user interaction, returns status, or has any side effects. Annotations provide minimal safety info, so the description partially compensates.

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 a single concise sentence with no redundant information. Every word contributes to explaining the tool's purpose.

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 no output schema and minimal annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return behavior, error cases, or prerequisites beyond 'active editor'. For a UI tool, one might need to know if it blocks, returns a job ID, or requires specific editor state.

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 has no description for the single parameter, but the tool description provides an example ('com.unity.cinemachine@2.9.7'), clarifying the expected format (package identifier with optional version). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 action: opens the package manager install UI for a specific package in the active editor. It specifies the resource (a package) and the action (opens install UI), and the example differentiates it from broader tools like open_deep_link or add_project_package.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that for programmatic installation one might use add_project_package, or for generic deep links use open_deep_link. The description lacks contextual usage advice.

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