agy_install_skill_from_github

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

Annotations are empty, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the core mechanism—temporarily cloning the repo and extracting the skill directory—and the return shape. It does not mention overwrite behavior, persistence, or failure modes, but the main behavior is transparent.

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 purpose is front-loaded in one clear sentence, followed by the mechanism, return format, and two useful examples. Each block earns its place, and there is no filler or redundant restating of schema fields.

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 medium-complexity tool with no annotations, the description covers what the tool does, how it works, what it returns, and how to call it with common argument shapes. Missing details like ctx semantics, overwrite/conflict handling, and explicit sibling selection keep it from being fully complete.

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 compensate. The examples provide meaningful semantics for repo and skill_path, showing that skill_path is optional and can point to a subdirectory like 'skills/fleet-expert'. However, ctx is entirely unexplained and there are no explicit parameter descriptions.

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 a specific action-and-resource pair: install a skill, and further specifies the source as a GitHub repository. The description makes it reasonably distinct from sibling agy_install_skill, though it does not explicitly name that alternative.

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 context is implied clearly: use this when installing a skill from a GitHub repository. The examples show both a bare repository call and a subdirectory call, but the description does not explicitly say when to prefer this over agy_install_skill or mention prerequisites/exclusions.

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