plugin_upgrade

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

Adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations, such as 'Existing settings and volumes created by the plugin persist across the upgrade,' and describes the return value as bool 'True after the upgrade completes.' It does not mention failure modes or side effects, but the provided information meaningfully exceeds the annotation hints.

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 well-structured with a clear purpose line, workflow notes, parameter explanations, and return type. Every sentence adds useful information without unnecessary fluff, making it appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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?

Covers the essential aspects: prerequisite steps, parameter behavior, persistence of settings/volumes, and return type. It does not address edge cases like what happens if the plugin is not installed or if the upgrade fails, but overall it provides sufficient context for correct invocation.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description explicitly documents both parameters with names and meanings: 'name - The plugin name to upgrade' and 'remote - Reference to upgrade to, e.g. "vieux/sshfs:next" (default: same as name).' This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 'Upgrade an installed plugin to a newer version,' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling plugin tools like plugin_install, plugin_disable, and plugin_remove by focusing on the upgrade action for already-installed plugins.

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?

Explicitly provides workflow guidance: 'The plugin must be disabled first — call `plugin_disable` before this, then `plugin_enable` afterwards to bring it back up.' It also explains when to use the `remote` parameter and when to omit it, giving clear context for usage.

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