detectInstallations

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

The description labels the tool as 'Read-only', which clarifies it does not modify state. This is sufficient since no annotations are provided. It could elaborate on what 'candidate' means, but the safety profile is clear.

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 two sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: usage guidance and behavioral note. It is front-loaded with the key verb and resource, with no wasted words.

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 has no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides all necessary context: when to use, what it does, and its read-only nature. It is complete for the tool's simplicity.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter details. Baseline score of 4 is appropriate for a parameterless tool.

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 explicitly states the tool discovers candidate K1/K2 installation paths using environment variables and platform defaults. The verb 'discover' and resource 'installation paths' are specific, and it differentiates from sibling tools like loadInstallation or getInstallationGraph.

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 begins with 'Use when you need to discover candidate K1/K2 installation paths', providing explicit use context. However, it does not mention when not to use it or point to alternative tools for related operations like loading or snapshotting.

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