update_firmware

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

Without annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It explains behavior for different printer types (Moonraker triggers Klipper update manager, OctoPrint uses Software Update plugin), describes the optional component parameter, and notes that all components with updates are upgraded if omitted. It lacks explicit detail on whether the update is asynchronous or blocks, but overall provides solid behavioral context.

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, using only a few sentences. It starts with a clear statement of purpose, then provides usage alternatives, parameter clarification, and a prerequisite. No extraneous information.

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 simple input (one optional param, no output schema) and missing annotations, the description covers all essentials: purpose, usage guidelines, parameter semantics, and behavioral notes. It does not describe return values, but for a command tool this is acceptable. It is complete enough for an agent to use effectively.

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 schema has one parameter with no description (0% coverage). The description adds meaning: 'Optional component name to update (e.g. 'klipper', 'moonraker'). If omitted, all components with available updates will be upgraded.' This explains both the value and the default behavior, going beyond the schema.

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 the tool's function: 'Start a firmware update on the default/connected printer (adapter-level, by component).' It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'update_printer_firmware' by specifying it is for the default/connected printer rather than fleet-specific updates with printer name or version pinning.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: 'For fleet setups where you need to update a specific printer by name or pin a target version, use update_printer_firmware instead.' It also states the prerequisite 'The printer must not be actively printing' and recommends checking firmware_status first.

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