install_skill

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the multi-step process, mandatory enhancement, time estimate (20-45 min), and auto-upload behavior. However, it does not mention failure modes or side effects like modifications to existing data.

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 and packs significant information into a few sentences. However, it mentions enhancement being mandatory twice, and the structure could be improved with bullet points for clarity.

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?

The tool has 7 parameters and an output schema. The description covers the main workflow and key parameters but omits 'unlimited' and 'dry_run', and does not explain return values or error handling. For a complex workflow, it is partially complete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains config_name, config_path, destination, auto_upload, and target (via LLM platforms), but does not cover 'unlimited' or 'dry_run'. This provides partial but not complete parameter clarity.

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 it's a 'complete one-command workflow' that performs specific steps (fetch config, scrape docs, AI enhance, package, upload). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like package_skill and upload_skill by being an all-in-one solution.

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 explains when to use this tool (for a full workflow) and provides context like mandatory AI enhancement and supported LLM platforms. However, it does not explicitly say when not to use it or mention alternatives like using separate steps if enhancement is not desired.

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