Upgrade system

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

Description labels the operation as '[HIGH RISK]' implying destructive consequences, yet annotations set 'destructiveHint: false', creating a direct contradiction. No further behavioral details are provided, such as impact on system availability, rollback capabilities, or required permissions.

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?

Description is a single sentence, which is concise but too minimal. It only includes the risk label and vague action, failing to justify its brevity with necessary detail.

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?

For a high-risk, state-changing operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description lacks essential context: no mention of what triggers the upgrade, expected outcomes, error states, or what 'system upgrade' entails. Incomplete for safe and 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?

Schema describes 'environmentId' as 'Environment ID' with 100% coverage. Description adds no additional meaning or context beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 states 'Perform an Arcane system upgrade', which is a specific verb and resource, but does not differentiate from siblings like 'arcane_system_check_upgrade' or 'arcane_updater_run'. The term 'system upgrade' is ambiguous regarding scope (global vs per-environment), and the presence of 'environmentId' param adds confusion.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Does not mention prerequisites, such as checking for upgrade availability via 'arcane_system_check_upgrade', or warn against concurrent upgrades. Lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use information.

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