td_self_update

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false; the description adds meaningful behavioral details: network-only, writes to specific paths, returns md5 fingerprints, and handles missing assets for certain releases. No contradictions.

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 yet comprehensive, front-loaded with the main action, and uses clear delineation of default vs install behavior and error cases. No redundant sentences.

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 one parameter, full schema coverage, and an output schema (not shown but referenced), the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, behavior, side effects, error handling, and safety. Complete for effective use.

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 single parameter check_only is fully described in the schema (100% coverage). The description reinforces its effect and adds context about the return values when check_only=True, slightly enhancing 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 checks for and optionally installs a newer TDPilot release, specifying default behavior and installation details. It distinguishes itself from all sibling tools which are about TouchDesigner operations, not self-update.

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 description explains when to use check_only vs install mode, and notes it is safe when TD is closed. It implicitly guides usage but does not explicitly name alternative tools for the same task (though none exist among siblings).

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