npmScore

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint) already disclose safety and external data access. Description adds the three metric categories but no additional behavioral details like caching, error handling, or API limits. Adequate given annotation coverage.

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?

Single sentence, 12 words, front-loaded and free of redundancy. Could benefit from a brief second sentence about output, but not excessive.

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?

Does not specify output format (e.g., number, object) or explain how the consolidated score is derived from the three metrics. With no output schema and many sibling tools, more completeness is needed to set agent expectations.

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?

Input schema covers both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description does not elaborate on parameter meaning or provide examples, so it adds no value 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?

Description clearly states the tool gets a consolidated package score based on quality, maintenance, and popularity. The verb 'Get' is specific, and the resource is well-defined, distinguishing it from sibling tools that focus on individual metrics.

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 information on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools (e.g., npmQuality, npmMaintenance, npmPopularity). The description lacks guidance on appropriate usage contexts or alternative tools.

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