install_cli

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses installation methods, cache location, system PATH impact, and uninstall procedure. It is transparent about where files land and how to clean up, though could mention potential network usage or error scenarios.

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 concise (4 sentences) and front-loads the purpose and a key instruction. It could be improved with bullet points for the methods, but remains clear and avoids redundancy.

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 simplicity (1 parameter, no output schema), the description is complete: it explains each method, side effects (cache location, not on PATH), and how to uninstall. No critical gaps remain.

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 description adds substantial meaning beyond the schema: it explains each enum value (download: prebuilt binary, go-install: compile from source, go-run: use go run without install), including size, speed, and dependencies. This is essential given 0% schema description coverage.

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 'Install the mockzilla CLI for this user' and details three specific methods, distinguishing the tool from siblings like check_cli and serve_locally.

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 instructs the agent to ask the user which method to use and lists prerequisites for each method (e.g., Go needed for go-install/go-run). It does not explicitly exclude scenarios but provides sufficient context for decision-making.

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