setup_install_polkit_rule

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: triggers a single pkexec prompt for this call, after which install_dependency runs without prompts; uses subject.active for all users; removal also triggers a prompt. No hidden side effects.

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 concise yet comprehensive, front-loading the critical purpose and criticality. The recommended flow is clearly formatted as a bullet list, and every sentence adds necessary context without 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?

Given the single boolean parameter and no output schema, the description covers all needed context: purpose, usage, platform restriction, dependency on user interaction, and side effects for both enable true and false. No gaps remain.

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 already describes the boolean 'enable' parameter with good coverage. Description adds value by explaining the behavioral difference between true and false (install vs remove, each triggering a prompt), surpassing the schema's basic description.

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 installs or removes a Linux polkit auto-approve rule, distinct from siblings like install_dependency. It specifies the resource (polkit rule) and action (install/remove), and notes Linux-only with a 501 error on other platforms.

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 an explicit recommended flow (run_diagnostics → this tool → install_dependency) and explains when to pass enable=false. Also states Linux-only, guiding the agent not to invoke on macOS/Windows.

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