get_skill_install

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It clearly states non-execution and the inclusion of a safety verification step. Additional details on response format or side effects would improve, but current description is adequate.

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 are concise and front-load the key action. No wasted words, though the second sentence could be more integrated. Marginally below 5 due to slight redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description should explain return value structure. It broadly states 'what to install, how, and what to verify first' but lacks specifics on output format. For a low-complexity tool with 2 params, this is adequate but not thorough.

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 has 100% coverage, so baseline is 3. Description adds context about 'safety line' but does not enhance parameter definitions beyond what the schema already provides (runtime enum, repo_full_name string).

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves install commands and safety lines, explicitly noting it does not execute anything. This distinguishes it from siblings (audit_skill, search_skills) which have different purposes.

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 implies the tool is for obtaining install instructions without executing, and notes that the agent/user will execute separately. However, it does not explicitly contrast with siblings or specify when not to use it.

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