update_buddy

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and discloses the key mutation: with install=true it downloads the update and opens Android's installer. It also states the user-confirmation constraint, but it does not cover network access, failure modes, or what happens when no update exists.

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 compact and front-loaded: it begins with the core check behavior, then explains install=true, then gives usage guidance. Every clause adds relevant information without redundancy.

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?

For a one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential call behavior, install side effect, usage context, and user-confirmation boundary. It could be more complete by describing the check result or no-update behavior, but it is broadly sufficient.

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 coverage is 100% and the install parameter already describes true behavior, so the baseline is 3. The description adds useful default-mode meaning by implying that without install=true the tool only checks for an update and reports what's new.

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 states a specific verb and resource: checking for a newer official GitHub release of Buddy and optionally downloading/opening Android's installer. It is clear and actionable, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from nearby tools like install_apk or wait_for_install.

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?

It gives a clear usage trigger: use when the user asks to update Buddy or asks whether a newer version exists. It also adds an important constraint that only the user can tap Update, though it does not name alternative tools or when not to use this one.

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