history_setup_ollama_direct

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It discloses installation location and that no sudo is required, plus cons about PATH and updates. However, it omits other behavioral traits such as idempotence, error handling, or prerequisites like internet connectivity.

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 compact, front-loaded with the core purpose, and uses a clear PROS/CONS structure that wastes no words. Every sentence conveys useful context.

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 the tool's moderate complexity and presence of an output schema, the description covers the primary install behavior and trade-offs. It could mention how the optional actions (pull model, start service) relate to the install, but those are already documented in the schema.

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 coverage is 100%, so differences in parameter behavior (install, pull_model, start_service) are already explicit in the schema. The description adds minimal beyond schema, only reinforcing the install path.

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 identifies a specific action—'Install Ollama via direct download (macOS)'—and distinguishes it from sibling history_setup_ollama by specifying the download source and target folder (~/Applications), making its scope evident.

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 PROS/CONS lists provide implicit guidance for when to choose this method (no Homebrew, no sudo, headless) and when not (manual PATH setup, no auto-updates), though it doesn't explicitly name a sibling alternative.

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