Resolve Addon Dependencies

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that it resolves the full recursive tree and the identifier format, but does not mention side effects (e.g., no modifications), rate limits, or return behavior. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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, no wasted words, front-loaded with key information. Ideal conciseness.

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?

No output schema provided, and the description does not explain the return format (e.g., tree structure). For a dependency resolution tool, the output nature is important context that is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, baseline 3. The description adds minimal value beyond schema, only clarifying the identifier is not GUID. The schema itself provides a detailed example and format.

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 action ('Resolve the full recursive dependency tree'), the resource ('addon versions'), and the identifier type ('addon ID or slug, not GUID'). It effectively distinguishes from the sibling tool 'resolve_mod_dependencies' by specifying 'addon'.

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 implies usage for resolving addon dependencies but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'resolve_mod_dependencies'. No 'when-not' or prerequisites are mentioned.

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