Install the @imqueue CLI

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

Annotations already signal destructive and non-read-only behavior, and the description adds concrete behavioral detail: global npm install, replacement of any existing imq, and permission requirements. This goes beyond the structured annotations without contradicting them, giving the agent practical expectations.

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 with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the important side effects and permission caveat are included efficiently. Every clause contributes meaning.

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 simple one-parameter signature and rich annotations, the description is sufficiently complete for an install operation. It covers the action, replacement behavior, a related status-check tool, and a permission caveat. The only minor gap is no mention of what the tool returns or prints, but that is not critical for an install-only command.

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?

The input schema already describes the only parameter, version, with its default and meaning. The description adds no further parameter detail because it focuses on command behavior. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate; the description does not need to compensate.

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 states a specific action ('Install @imqueue/cli globally') with the exact npm command and resource. It also references cli_status, which distinguishes this tool from the related check-status sibling. The purpose is unmistakable and unambiguous.

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 gives clear context for when to use this tool: to install the CLI globally and replace an existing imq installation. It also mentions cli_status as the tool that reports presence, implying an install-vs-check workflow. It does not explicitly enumerate when not to use alternatives, but the context is strong enough for an agent to select correctly.

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