install_android

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the burden of disclosing side effects such as system modifications, downloads, permissions needed, or reversibility. The single sentence only says 'install' without any details on behavior, scope, or consequences. This is a significant gap for a mutation 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?

The description is extremely concise and front-loaded with the key verb and object. It is a single sentence without fluff, earning a high score. However, it is so brief that it borders on under-specification, so it does not reach the top score.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and no usage guidance, the description leaves many gaps: what 'development tools' includes, whether superuser rights are needed, whether it modifies system paths, and what the expected outcome is. For a setup tool, this is insufficient for an agent to invoke confidently.

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 schema has zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to explain. Per the rubric, 0 params defaults to a baseline of 4. The description does not need to add parameter semantics since none exist.

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 ('Install') and the target ('Android Studio and development tools'). This distinguishes it from siblings like install_python and install_nodejs, though 'development tools' is somewhat vague. It is not a tautology and provides concrete intent.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like install_tool or install_multiple. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or comparison with sibling tools. The description simply states what it does without usage context.

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