Get install instructions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint false, and openWorldHint false, so safety behavior is covered. The description adds useful context beyond annotations: version pinning, source document, content types (npm commands, CDN URLs, import statements), and a cross-reference to get_component. No auth or rate-limit details, but they are not essential for this simple read tool.

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?

A single dense sentence that is front-loaded with the purpose ("How to install Perfect UI 1.0.0:") and then lists content. It is information-rich without being redundant, though the list is somewhat run-on.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. Annotations cover safety profile. The description supplies content scope, version pinning, source document, and a related-tool pointer. For a zero-parameter retrieval tool, this is nearly complete, with only explicit usage routing 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?

Zero parameters, so baseline is 4. There is no parameter semantics to add or clarify.

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?

States specific content and version (Perfect UI 1.0.0 install instructions: npm, other package managers, CDN URLs, import statements, all pinned). It also clarifies its relationship to get_component by noting that get_component explains when the script is needed. However, it does not distinguish itself from list_components or search_docs.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The only routing hint is that get_component with name installation explains when the script is needed. Usage is implied by the description's content scope rather than stated.

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