install_laravel

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states the tool 'generates commands', which implies it does not execute them, but it does not disclose whether it modifies files, what output format to expect, or any side effects. This is insufficient behavioral transparency for a tool that might be expected to execute installation.

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, information-dense sentence. It is front-loaded with the core action ('Generate Laravel 13 installation commands') and immediately specifies key details (PHP 8.4, Livewire). No filler or redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple with only two parameters and no output schema, but the description omits essential operational details: the expected output format (command list? script?), whether it writes files, and the role of projectName. The description is not complete enough for an agent to reliably invoke the tool without further assumptions.

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 mentions Livewire setup, which partially clarifies the 'features' parameter, but it does not explain the required 'projectName' parameter or the meaning of other potential feature values. The description adds some value but leaves major gaps.

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 purpose: generating Laravel 13 installation commands, with specific details about PHP 8.4 upgrade and Livewire setup. This distinguishes it from the many generate_* sibling tools, as it is the only one focused on installation.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While it is implicitly for initial Laravel installation, the description does not mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or when a different tool (e.g., generate_livewire_component) would be more appropriate.

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