Manage Updates

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description details that installs run asynchronously, take minutes, and require polling to monitor progress. It also clarifies read-only mode behavior. No contradictions with annotations; this adds significant value.

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 well-structured with clear sections: overview, scope, behavioral notes, examples, and return documentation. Every sentence adds value, and the key information is front-loaded. No unnecessary verbiage.

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 tool's complexity (multiple actions, async execution, categories, return types), the description thoroughly covers all aspects. It explains return formats, mentions the ha_mcp_update status, and provides practical examples. No gaps remain 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds behavioral context beyond the schema, such as mutual exclusivity of entity_ids and categories for install, and the effect of include_release_notes on the response. It enhances understanding of parameter interactions.

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's purpose: 'Manage Home Assistant updates -- list, read details, batch install, skip, or un-skip.' It lists the covered update domains (Core, OS, supervisor, apps, device firmware, HACS), making the scope explicit. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that handle different aspects of Home Assistant.

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 each action (list, get, install, skip, clear_skipped) and provides examples. It notes read-only mode behavior and asynchronous installs with polling instructions. However, it does not explicitly exclude scenarios or compare to specific sibling tools, which would elevate to a 5.

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