helm_update_stack

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It indicates mutation ('Update') but does not mention idempotency, required permissions, field preservation behavior, or error handling. The mismatch between the description listing specific fields and the schema allowing additional properties adds confusion.

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 a single clear sentence, but it lacks structure (e.g., parameter breakdown) that would aid readability. It is concise but could be more organized.

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 complexity (2 required params, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, no annotations), the description is insufficient. It omits return values, prerequisites, and typical usage patterns, leaving an agent underinformed.

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 should compensate. It lists valid fields for 'updates' but the schema allows any additional properties, creating a contradiction. The 'name_or_id' parameter is not explained at all.

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 verb 'Update' and the resource 'stack', and specifies the updatable fields 'name, description, tags' and the partial nature. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other update tools like helm_update_service, which slightly reduces clarity.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., helm_create_stack, helm_delete_stack) or when not to use it. The agent must infer that it is for updating existing stacks, but there is no explicit context.

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