add

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

There are no annotations, and the description only states the action without disclosing side effects, whether it modifies a manifest, installs the package, updates lockfiles, or requires network access. This leaves the agent without information about the tool's behavioral traits.

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 a single sentence with no wasted words and immediately states the tool's purpose. However, it may be too minimal to be fully informative, which is why it earns a 4 rather than 5.

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 a simple two-parameter schema and output schema, the description lacks crucial context about the tool's behavior, such as whether it updates the lockfile, installs the package, or only edits the dependency manifest, and provides no usage guidance relative to siblings. This makes the description insufficient for reliable tool selection.

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 fully documents both parameters (package_name and version) with clear descriptions, achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 uses the verb 'Add' with object 'a dependency' and scope 'current project', clearly identifying the action. It is concise but does not distinguish itself from sibling tools like pip_install or remove, which also operate on project dependencies.

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 such as pip_install, sync, or lock, nor any conditions under which it should not be used. The description only states the basic action, leaving usage decisions to the agent.

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