Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
kernl

kernl

by fastslack
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

kernel_extensions_update

Upgrade an installed extension in place from a local .kernl bundle path, replacing the current version without a full reinstall.

Instructions

Upgrade an installed extension in place from a local .kernl bundle path.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "bundle_path": "<bundle_path>"
    },
    "name": "kernel_extensions_update"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
forceNo
bundle_pathYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.5.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does convey that this is an in-place mutation of an existing installation, but it says nothing about permissions, whether a restart or activation is needed afterward, rollback on failure, or what the unexplained 'force' flag overrides.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single well-formed sentence with the key constraint ('in place', 'local .kernl bundle path') front-loaded. No filler, though the terseness leaves the force parameter and failure behavior unaddressed.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and zero parameter documentation, the description is too thin. It should cover the force flag's purpose, prerequisites, and at least the mutating side effects or failure mode.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the parameters. It adds meaning for bundle_path ('local .kernl bundle path'), but the 'force' boolean is left entirely undefined; its effect on the upgrade is unstated in the description and the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Upgrade an installed extension in place from a local .kernl bundle path.' The phrase 'in place' plus 'upgrade' implicitly separates it from the sibling kernel_extensions_install_bundle (fresh install), though it never names that alternative explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The word 'installed' implies a precondition (the extension must already exist) and the phrase 'in place' implies an upgrade over an install. However, the description never explicitly says when to choose this over kernel_extensions_install_bundle, nor what happens if the extension is not installed.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools