install_extension

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

Annotations indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false), and the description correctly implies a write operation. It adds context about the permanent parameter and the three installation methods, but does not elaborate on potential side effects like browser restart requirements.

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?

Two sentences efficiently convey the core action and installation options without superfluous text, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 description covers the installation methods and the permanent option, but lacks information about return values (success/failure) or conditions like compatibility requirements, which are relevant for a tool with no output 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 parameters are well documented. The description adds value by clarifying the purpose of the 'path' parameter and explaining the 'type' enum options, though it does not provide additional details for 'value' or 'permanent' beyond what the schema offers.

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 it installs a Firefox extension using WebDriver BiDi, and lists the three supported installation methods (archive, base64, unpacked directory), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like uninstall_extension.

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 usage for installing extensions but does not explicitly state when to choose one installation method over another or provide any prerequisites or limitations.

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