pio_pkg_install

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the key side effect (adds to platformio.ini) and implies package download, but does not describe reversibility, permissions, network requirements, or behavior when a package already exists.

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?

Efficient two-sentence structure that front-loads the main purpose before spec examples. No fluff, though the env note could be integrated more naturally.

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 4 parameters and 0% schema coverage, the description leaves type and project_dir undefined. It also does not mention output or failure modes, making it incomplete for an install operation.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains spec clearly with examples and env with a usage note, but type is only vaguely implied and project_dir is completely absent.

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?

States a specific verb (install), resource (library/platform/tool), and outcome (add to platformio.ini). Clearly distinguishes from sibling package management tools like pkg_update, pkg_uninstall, and pkg_list.

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?

Provides spec format examples and a specific usage tip (restrict to one env with env=). Does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over siblings like pkg_search or pkg_update, but the install/update/search distinction is contextually clear.

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