rew_install_discover

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the scope across platforms and the optional path fallback, but does not disclose return format, error handling, side effects, or what happens when discovery fails. This is a significant gap for a discovery 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?

Both sentences are necessary and front-load the core purpose. There is no filler or redundancy; the description is tightly written and efficient.

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?

The tool is simple, but without an output schema, the description omits the return value (e.g., the path found), which an agent would need to know. The parameter behavior is covered, but output and error behavior are missing, leaving the description only partially 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?

Even though schema description coverage is 0%, the description explains the single parameter as an explicit absolute executable path to use when automatic discovery fails. This adds meaning beyond the raw string type in the schema, providing both format and purpose.

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 tool finds a local REW installation across Windows, macOS, and Linux, using a specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools, but the purpose is unambiguous and not a tautology.

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 when to use the tool (when needing to locate a REW installation) but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or which sibling tools might be alternatives. It does give one usage condition for the optional parameter (when automatic discovery fails), which is helpful but not enough for a full usage guideline.

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