ensure_annotation_addon

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

Annotations already say it is a non-readOnly, openWorld, non-destructive mutation. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond that: it will not restart an open editor and refuses modified/unowned files, and it supports dryRun/expectedHash for safe verification. It could still say more about permissions or output, but output schema exists.

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?

Four short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. The primary purpose comes first, followed by key constraints and supported options.

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 mutation tool with an output schema, the description discloses the key safeguards (no editor restart, refuses modified files) and mentions optional safety parameters. It is only incomplete because expectedExportHash is never addressed and parameter semantics are thin.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It merely names dryRun and expectedHash without explaining what they do, and it omits expectedExportHash entirely, leaving two of four parameters effectively undocumented.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: 'Install and enable the bundled annotation addon' in a selected project. Clearly distinguishable from siblings like enable_editor_plugin (generic plugin) and remove_annotation_addon/get_annotation_status.

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?

Implies usage when you need the annotation addon installed, and gives failure conditions (refuses modified/unowned files, does not restart an open editor). However, it never explicitly names alternatives such as get_annotation_status or remove_annotation_addon or states when not to use it.

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