cb_updates

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavior itself. It does not state that this operation is read-only, what it returns, whether it queries live data or cached data, or any side effects or access requirements. It only labels the result set.

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 extremely short and front-loaded, but it is an incomplete noun phrase rather than a full instruction like 'Lists available CustomBuild updates'. It is concise, yet it sacrifices the structural clarity that would help an agent understand the intended action.

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 output schema exists, so return values do not need explanation, and there are no parameters. However, the description is too terse to fully support tool selection among a very large sibling set that includes similar CustomBuild and system-update tools. It lacks enough context about what distinguishes this update listing from cb_versions or system_packages_updates.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema is empty with 100% coverage, so the description does not need to explain parameter behavior. The baseline for a no-parameter tool is 4, and no parameter-related gaps exist.

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 identifies the resource ('CustomBuild updates') and implies an availability query, but it is only a noun phrase with no explicit verb such as 'list' or 'get'. It does not clearly distinguish itself from related tools like cb_versions, cb_software, or system_packages_updates.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The phrase 'Available CustomBuild updates' implies a read-only listing, but there are no explicit usage contexts, exclusions, or comparisons to sibling tools.

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