agent_install

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions file creation and optional .mcp.json write, but fails to disclose overwrite behavior (despite 'force' param), side effects, or required permissions. The term 'Install' implies setup but no detail on mutation.

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 short (two sentences) and front-loaded, but omits important parameter and behavioral context. It earns its place but could include more details without losing conciseness.

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?

With 5 parameters (20% coverage), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain 'target' enum, 'dry_run' effect, or 'force' interaction, leaving significant gaps for an agent to understand usage fully.

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?

Only the 'mcp' parameter has a description; the other four ('path', 'target', 'force', 'dry_run') are undocumented beyond schema. Schema coverage is 20%, and the description adds no explanation for these crucial parameters, forcing the agent to guess.

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 it installs 'pcq agent runtime assets' and names specific files (AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, SKILL.md). The verb 'Install' and resource are specific, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'agent_status' or 'apply_plan'.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'agent_status' for checking installation or 'apply_plan' for deployment. Missing prerequisites or context for when installation is needed.

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