axint.upgrade

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, but description expands with specifics: 'destructive when apply=true: can run package installs, refresh Xcode wiring, write .axint/upgrade; may use npm network'. It also mentions preserving agent thread, adding beyond annotations.

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?

Two informative sentences plus a 'Use:' and 'Effects:' section. Front-loaded with purpose and key details. Every sentence adds value; no fluff.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (destructive, 7 parameters, output schema), the description covers usage context, effects, return artifacts, and limitations. Output schema exists but description summarizes key outputs. Complete.

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 description coverage is 100% with each parameter having a description. The tool description does not add additional meaning to parameters beyond the schema, so baseline 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?

The description clearly states it checks the latest Axint package and optionally applies the upgrade while preserving the agent thread. It also lists return artifacts and distinguishes from 'app dependency upgrades', making the purpose specific and distinct from siblings.

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 when-to-use: 'call when axint.status shows a stale server' and when-not-to-use: 'not for app dependency upgrades'. Does not name alternative sibling tools but gives clear context. Missing explicit alternatives lowers it from 5.

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