Update an existing SkyPilot service with a new task configuration using rolling or blue-green deployment; returns a request_id.
Update an existing service with a new task configuration. Set mode to 'rolling' (default) or 'blue_green'. Returns a request_id.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| mode | No | rolling | |
| task_yaml | Yes | ||
| service_name | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true. The description adds the mode semantics and notes a request_id is returned, but says nothing about deployment behavior, rollback, or whether a rolling update can fail mid-way. Modest value beyond the 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?
Three lean sentences with the core action front-loaded and no filler. Efficient, though the return-value note is slightly redundant given an output schema exists.
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 covers the return value and annotations cover the safety profile, so those are not needed. However, for a mutation tool with 0% param coverage, the description omits the task_yaml format, the meaning of service_name, and any failure/reversibility context.
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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It documents only 'mode' (rolling default / blue_green) and leaves both required parameters, task_yaml and service_name, entirely unexplained, including the format of the YAML config. It does not compensate for the coverage gap.
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?
States a specific verb (Update) and resource (an existing service) plus the operative input (a new task configuration). It distinguishes itself conceptually from skypilot_serve_up (create) and skypilot_serve_down, though it never names a sibling to sharpen the boundary.
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 mode options ('rolling' default vs 'blue_green') give some operational guidance, but there is no statement of when to pick this over skypilot_serve_up, serve_down, or terminate_replica, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is only implied.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.