iyke_pkg_install_scope_set

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the burden. It discloses that changing scope triggers a kernel reconcile and causes sidecars to start/stop accordingly. This gives the agent clear behavioral expectations for the tool's side effects.

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?

Two crisp sentences cover purpose, parameters, and side effects without unnecessary detail. Every word adds value, making it highly efficient for an AI agent to parse.

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 simple scope-change tool with no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It explains the scope parameter and side effects. However, it doesn't specify the format of pkg_id or how to obtain it, which would be helpful but is not critical given the context.

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 explanation of the 'scope' parameter adds significant meaning beyond the schema, detailing the exact format and effect. The 'pkg_id' parameter is mentioned but not elaborated, though its role is inferable from context. Given 0% schema coverage, the description compensates well.

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's purpose: 'Change the scope of an installed pkg.' It specifies the two valid scope values ('workspace' and 'project:<id>') and their meanings, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like iyke_pkg_uninstall or iyke_pkg_list.

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 provides explicit scope options and their behavioral implications, guiding when each scope should be used. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide any exclusions, leaving a slight gap in guidance.

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