axint.agent.install

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

Description details effects: 'writes .axint/agent, context, and coordination files; no network', which aligns with annotations (idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false). Adds behavioral context beyond annotations.

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?

Three concise sentences front-loading the core purpose, usage, and effects. No wasted words; every sentence adds value.

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?

Covers purpose, usage, effects, and parameter roles. With an output schema present, no need to detail return values. Complete for an installer tool.

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?

Schema has 100% parameter descriptions, but description adds functional context like 'cwd scopes local coordination' and 'projectName and hosts shape generated project-brain files', providing meaning beyond 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 'Install the local Axint multi-agent project brain' with specific verb and resource. It lists the files written, distinguishing it from sibling tools like axint.compile by noting 'not needed for one-off compile'.

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?

Explicitly says 'use once per project to create local multi-agent coordination; not needed for one-off compile', providing clear when-to-use and when-to-avoid guidance.

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