install_sketchup_bridge

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (idempotent, non-destructive, non-read-only), and the description adds real behavioral detail beyond them: exactly which files are copied, the target Plugins path, that a restart is required, and that dry_run only reports. This is useful operational context the annotations do not convey.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded, then mechanics, then parameter semantics, then the return note. Dense but nearly every sentence earns its place; the Windows path detail is slightly verbose but justified for a filesystem-writing tool.

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?

For a mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers what it writes, where, the restart requirement, dry-run behavior, and even the returned rbz path. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly; only explicit 'when to prefer manual install' guidance is absent.

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 carry the parameters, and it does: 'Empty versions = every version opened at least once' defines the versions default, and 'dry_run=true only reports what would be done' defines dry_run. Both parameters get meaningful semantics not present in the schema.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Install the SU MCP Bridge extension') and the reason ('so the other tools can connect'), which distinguishes it from every sibling (model/entity manipulation tools). An agent can immediately tell this is the setup/bootstrap tool.

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 'so the other tools can connect' clause implies this is a prerequisite when other tools fail, and it clarifies the restart requirement and the dry_run preview path. It does not explicitly state 'call this first if the bridge is not connected,' but the context is clear.

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