SDK manager

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

Annotations already declare openWorldHint=true (downloads over the network) and destructiveHint=false, so the description only needs to add context. It usefully adds the Command-line Tools prerequisite, but omits license acceptance, download size/time, and whether install is additive vs replacing — meaningful for a mutating action.

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?

One tight sentence: capability first, package-id examples second, prerequisite last. Nothing redundant and no filler.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description could say what list_installed/list_available return, and nothing explains multi-package install semantics for an array parameter. Prerequisite and example syntax are covered, but the definition is only adequate for a two-param, mutation-capable tool.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the burden. It does supply concrete package-id syntax ('platforms;android-36', 'system-images;android-36;google_apis;x86_64'), which is the key gap, but it never explains that 'action' selects the mode or that 'packages' is an array accepting multiple IDs.

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 verbs (list installed/available, install) and the exact resource (SDK packages), and gives concrete package-id examples. An agent can tell this is SDK/command-line-tools package management rather than app installation, though it never names the siblings it is distinct from (packages_list, app_install, app_uninstall).

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?

Usage is implied by the action enumeration, and one prerequisite is stated ('Requires the SDK Command-line Tools package'). However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over packages_list or app_install, and no note on whether 'install' requires the list actions first.

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