install_package

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

No annotations were provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions version pinning, progress tracking, dependency resolution, extended timeout, and error reporting. This provides good insight, though it does not explicitly state if the operation is safe or destructive.

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 well-structured with sections and examples, but it is somewhat verbose. The key information is front-loaded, though some repetition could be trimmed.

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 complexity and good schema descriptions, the description is mostly complete. It mentions the return type ExecutionResponse, which compensates for the lack of an output schema. However, it could include more detail on error handling or preconditions.

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?

Parameter descriptions in the schema are detailed, so schema coverage is high (100%). The tool description adds value by summarizing version pinning and providing examples beyond the schema, earning a 4.

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 packages using pip, npm, or Go modules with version control. The verb 'install' and resource 'packages' are specific and distinguish it from siblings execute_code and shell.

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 clear context for when to use the tool (package installation across environments) but lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives. Knowledge of siblings suggests alternative tools for code execution or shell commands.

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