Get an appCN component

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

As no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns comprehensive component details and recommends installation practices. No contradictions or hidden side effects are present.

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 extremely concise (two sentences) yet informative, front-loading the main purpose and including usage advice without extraneous content.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema or annotations, the description covers purpose, behavior, and usage guidance, making it fully sufficient for correct agent invocation.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the description adds value by providing examples of valid slugs and clarifying it is a unique identifier, going beyond the schema's minimal description.

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 defines what the tool does: it provides everything needed to add and correctly use one appCN component, including docs, source files, dependencies, and install command. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_components and search_components.

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 advises preferring the install command over manual file pasting to resolve dependencies, offering actionable guidance. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like get_install_command.

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