get_updates

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention whether the operation is read-only, if authentication is required, what the response format is, or how the optional node parameter affects the result. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to anticipate side effects or output.

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 a single sentence that is direct and front-loaded. It contains no redundant information and every word adds value. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, so the description should compensate by explaining return values, scope, and behavior. It only states 'Get available updates for Proxmox,' leaving unclear what the output looks like, how node filtering works, and whether it contacts remote repositories. For a tool with one optional parameter, this is still incomplete.

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 input schema fully describes the sole parameter 'node' with a clear description and optional status, so schema coverage is 100%. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema itself is sufficient.

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 action ('Get') and the resource ('available updates for Proxmox'), which is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_proxmox_version or get_node_status. Even though the node parameter is not mentioned, the core purpose is unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no exclusions, and no mention of prerequisites. For example, there is no suggestion to use this before upgrade_proxmox or to check updates on specific nodes. It is a bare statement of functionality.

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