Install Module Pack

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description adds value by highlighting the need for confirmation and the dryRun workflow. It also mentions 'repair, update, or uninstall' which implies mutating behavior, complementing the annotations without contradicting them.

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 that states the action and key workflow guidance. No filler or redundancy; every word earns its place.

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 complexity (4 params, one required, destructive action) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the core workflow (dryRun first, confirmation needed) and the package scope. It doesn't describe return values, but that is expected to be in the output schema. Overall, adequate for agent selection and 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 descriptions cover all parameters (100% coverage) with clear explanations for pack, action, dryRun, and confirm. The description does not add extra parameter detail beyond what's in the schema; the baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema already carries the burden.

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 the action: 'Install, repair, update, or uninstall one AirMCP add-on package' – a specific verb-resource combination. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_module_packs (listing) and preview_action (preview) by focusing on the mutating operations and explicit user confirmation.

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 an explicit guideline to 'Use dryRun first to preview the npm command' and emphasizes 'after explicit user confirmation', which sets expectations for prerequisites. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use the tool, relying on the action enum and sibling names to infer scope.

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