npm_install

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and omits critical side effects like modifying package.json, creating node_modules, or requiring network access, which is essential for a mutation tool.

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 is concise and waste-free. However, it may be too terse for a tool with side effects, but conciseness itself is well executed.

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?

Although an output schema exists and parameter descriptions are thorough, the tool description lacks essential context about installation behavior, side effects, and prerequisites. This is a mutation tool with no annotation support, making the description incomplete for safe 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?

The input schema fully documents all three parameters (confirm, packages, save_dev) with clear descriptions, so the description need not add parameter semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema covers parameter meaning comprehensively.

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 'Install npm packages' uses a specific verb (install) and resource (npm packages), effectively conveying the primary function. It is distinguishable from siblings like npm_run and npm_list, though it doesn't add details beyond the tool name itself.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as npm_run, npm_list, or install_package. It lacks context about prerequisites, exclusions, or typical scenarios.

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