list_custom_component_installations

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

With no annotations, the description provides some behavioral insight by noting that the output is automatically stored and can be referenced via object ID. However, it omits details like authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether the operation is read-only.

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 moderately concise and front-loaded with the main action. It includes parameter docs and output notes without excessive verbosity, though some redundancy exists in explaining object storage.

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?

Given no output schema, the description mentions 'Custom component installations or error message' but lacks detail on the exact return structure. It does not clarify workspace context, deletion status, or when pagination might be needed.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description fully documents both parameters: 'limit' as max per page and 'after' as cursor for pagination. This adds essential meaning beyond the schema.

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 'List custom component installations', which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_component_families and get_custom_components by focusing on installations.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as list_component_families or get_custom_components. The description does not mention filters or scope, leaving the agent without context for tool selection.

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