get_package_info

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses 'when available' for GitHub details and specifies 'last-week downloads,' but it omits behavior around the includeReadme parameter, version resolution, or failure modes when sources are unavailable.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the primary action and lists key outputs. No wasted words or redundant details.

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 composite tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description provides a serviceable overview but misses critical details like the effect of includeReadme, version fallback behavior, and what 'enriched' includes beyond the listed items. The incompleteness is noticeable for an aggregator tool.

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 does not explain the version or includeReadme parameters; only 'name' is implied by 'package info.' This leaves agents guessing about parameter purposes.

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 specific components: registry metadata, last-week downloads, and GitHub repo details. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_downloads and get_readme, which are more specialized.

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 implies use for obtaining a comprehensive package overview, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like calling get_downloads or get_readme separately. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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