axint.agent.install

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

The description adds detail beyond annotations: it specifies the exact files written (.axint/agent.json, etc.) and states 'no network.' Annotations already indicate idempotent and non-destructive, but the description confirms local-only writes.

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 sentences, front-loaded with core purpose, followed by usage and effects. No redundant words.

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?

The description covers purpose, usage, effects, and constraints (local, no network). With an output schema present, return values are not needed. Could mention parameter options briefly, but overall good.

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 no additional parameter information. It focuses on overall purpose, which is acceptable given baseline 3.

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 installs the local Axint multi-agent project brain, specifies the files it writes, and distinguishes its use from one-off compile, differentiating it from sibling tools like axint.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?

The description gives explicit usage guidance: 'use once per project' and 'not needed for one-off compile.' However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools for one-off compile, though the context of siblings makes it clear.

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