Package Info (deps.dev)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds useful context about scope (all versions, 50M+ packages) and cross-ecosystem nature, providing value beyond the annotations without contradiction.

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?

Two sentences, no fluff, front-loaded with key purpose and scope. Every sentence adds value.

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's simplicity (2 params, read-only), the description covers purpose, ecosystems, and relationship to alternatives. Output schema exists, so return value documentation is not needed.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds examples of package names (express, requests, etc.) and lists ecosystems, aiding parameter understanding beyond 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?

The description clearly states 'Get package metadata from Google deps.dev' with specific resources (all versions, default version, ecosystem). It distinguishes from sibling tools by emphasizing cross-ecosystem unified view, covering six major ecosystems.

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 notes 'Complements npm/PyPI registries with cross-ecosystem unified view,' indicating when to prefer this tool over ecosystem-specific ones. While explicit when-not-to-use is absent, the context is clear enough.

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