update_openresty_module

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, and it discloses nothing about behavior: not whether the change is reversible, whether a restart/rebuild is required, whether elevated privileges or an XPack license are needed, or what the "(XPack)" qualifier implies for availability. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage this is a complete gap.

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 single fragment is short, front-loaded, and free of filler, which is good. But it is under-specified rather than genuinely concise, and the parenthetical "(XPack)" is unexplained, so it reads more like a label than a description.

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?

A mutation tool with a nested, undocumented payload, no annotations, no output schema, and a large family of overlapping OpenResty siblings needs far more than six words. Nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is present.

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?

There is one required parameter, a nested object named "params", documented at 0% coverage with no properties defined. The description adds no meaning whatsoever about what the module payload should contain, so an agent cannot construct a valid call from either source.

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 names a verb and a resource ("Update OpenResty module"), so it is not a tautology like the bare tool name would be. However it gives no indication of what "update" means here (enable/disable, version change, config?) and does nothing to separate it from siblings such as update_openresty_by_file, update_openresty_conf, or get_openresty_modules.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the alternative OpenResty tools an agent could pick instead. The agent is left to infer from the name alone that this is a config-mutation path versus the read-only get_openresty_* siblings.

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