get_setup_guide

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes the tool as returning instructions ('get'), implying a safe read operation, but does not explicitly state idempotency, side effects, or auth requirements. It lacks detail on whether the tool alone provides complete setup guidance.

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 sentences and zero wasted words. The first sentence fronts the core purpose, and the second provides immediate usage context. Highly efficient.

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, the description adequately covers purpose and usage. It could optionally describe the return format, but this is not critical given the tool's simplicity and lack of output schema.

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 input schema has one parameter 'identifier' with a clear description. The tool description adds usage context but no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides. With 100% schema coverage, a score of 3 is appropriate as per guidelines.

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 begins with a specific verb-resource pair: 'Get installation and setup instructions for a specific AI resource from SkillHub.' It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_resource' (which likely returns the resource itself) and 'recommend' (for recommendations), as it provides installation context.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool: 'Use this after recommending a resource to help the user actually install and configure it.' This gives clear contextual guidance, although it does not mention specific situations where the tool should not be used.

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