milehost-self-update

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states it 'downloads and applies' an update, which implies changing the running server, but does not warn about potential restarts, dropped connections, or what happens to the current session. For a self-update operation this is a notable transparency gap.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the action and source; the second gives a clear operational mandate for the agent. Both sentences earn their place.

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 description clearly explains what the tool does and when to invoke it, but for a tool that updates the server itself, it omits expected side effects (restart, connection interruption, update results). With no annotations and no output schema, a bit more detail about the outcome or risks would be needed for full completeness.

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 covers 100% of the parameters with descriptions for both 'force' and 'branch'. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable since the schema already documents them well. Baseline 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 clearly names the verb ('Downloads and applies'), the resource ('latest version of MileHost MCP Server'), and the source (official GitHub repository). It does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like milehost_check_updates, but the action is specific enough that an agent can understand what it does.

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 'AI AGENT MANDATE' provides explicit trigger conditions for when to run the tool: when an operation fails, when tools/features are missing, or when UPDATE_REQUIRED is detected. It does not mention when not to use it or alternatives, but the guidance is clear and actionable.

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