Install an adapter

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=false. The description adds the HTTP method (POST) and authorization class ('board_or_agent'), which provide some behavioral context beyond annotations. However, it does not explain potential side effects or what 'install' entails (e.g., downloading, enabling).

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 extremely short (two sentences) and avoids verbosity. However, it lacks substance—repeating the title and adding only endpoint/auth info. It is not well-structured to front-load critical usage 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?

Despite the complexity of the tool (nested input, output schema, many siblings), the description does not explain what the output represents, how to interpret results, or when this tool is needed. It leaves the agent without enough context to use it reliably.

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%, meaning the description does not mention any parameters. The input schema has one required parameter (body) with nested fields (packageName, version, isLocalPath), but the description provides no explanation of their semantics, purpose, or how they affect the installation. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 'Install an adapter' with a specific verb and resource, matching the title. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like pc_post_adapters_by_type_reinstall, missing an opportunity to clarify the unique scope.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., reinstall). There is no context about prerequisites, such as needing a package name, or when installation is appropriate. The description offers no usage direction.

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