opkg_install

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

With no annotations present, the description must disclose behavioral details itself. It only states that a package is installed, omitting side effects like dependency resolution, system modification, or potential need for network 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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler words. It is concise but somewhat sparse, so it does not reach the level of a model description.

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 it is a mutating system-level operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is under-informative. It fails to mention side effects, prerequisites, or expected outcomes.

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% and the sole parameter is clearly described as 'Package name to install'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Install') and resource ('a package via opkg'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like opkg_remove, opkg_update, and opkg_list.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or prerequisites such as running opkg_update first. There is no mention of 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.