install_app

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

The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the annotations. readOnlyHint=false already signals a write operation, but the description does not disclose prerequisites (e.g., whether the simulator must be booted), side effects (e.g., overwriting an existing installation), or return behavior. No annotation contradiction is present.

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 clear sentence with no unnecessary words or repetition. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose without fluff.

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 simple tool with good schema coverage and annotations, the description is largely sufficient. It clearly states the action and target. The lack of information about side effects or prerequisites is a minor gap, but the annotations and schema cover the essential details 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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters (udid and app_path) are fully documented. The description does not add any parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides, thus earning the baseline score of 3.

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 tool's function with a specific verb 'installs' and the resource ('app bundle (.app or .ipa) on the iOS Simulator'). It is distinct from sibling tools like launch_app or list_apps, as installation is a different operation.

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 usage context is implied by the verb 'installs' — an agent would know to use this when needing to install an app on the simulator. However, there is no explicit guidance on alternatives or when not to use it (e.g., for launching or listing apps).

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