add_sticker_pack

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the return shape ({status, pack_id}), that pack_id is parsed from the URI, and that no separate list_sticker_packs call is needed. It could add more about error behavior or side effects, but for a simple install operation it is reasonably 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?

Three sentences with no filler. Each sentence earns its place: what the tool does, what it returns and how to use it downstream, and when to prefer a sibling tool. The most critical information is front-loaded.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers everything needed to call it correctly: the required URI format, the return value, and the relationship to related sticker tools. No meaningful gap remains for correct invocation.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the required URI format and signal.art domain, but it largely repeats what the input schema already states rather than adding substantial new parameter semantics.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: "Install a Signal sticker pack from a signal.art URL." It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like list_sticker_packs and send_sticker by explaining that pack_id is parsed and ready for direct use.

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?

It explicitly tells the agent when to use list_sticker_packs instead: when browsing sticker_id/emoji contents is needed. It also explains how the output feeds directly into get_sticker or send_sticker/send_group_sticker, reducing ambiguity about when this tool is appropriate.

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