update_runtimes

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses key behaviors: default dry-run safety, what happens with apply=True, and the specific update commands that will be executed. This is transparent about side effects and operational impact.

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 concise, front-loaded with the purpose, and uses clear formatting (dashes, parenthetical list, backticks for parameters). Every sentence adds value without 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?

The description covers core behavior, safety profile, and even return value in dry-run mode. The only notable omission is the timeout parameter's meaning, but given the output schema exists, the tool is well specified overall.

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 description explains 'apply' and 'languages' clearly, adding meaning beyond the bare schema names. It does not clarify 'timeout', which is a minor gap given the schema coverage is 0%.

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?

Clearly states 'Update language runtimes', a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'runtimes_status' by focusing on the action of updating, and lists concrete commands, leaving no ambiguity about the tool's role.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on the dry-run vs. actual execution via the apply flag, and explains the languages parameter (subset or all). It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is strong and actionable.

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