Update apt package lists

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

Annotations already indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false), idempotency (idempotentHint=true), and non-destructiveness (destructiveHint=false). The description adds 'refresh package indexes' but does not elaborate on side effects like network dependency or potential time consumption. It does not contradict annotations.

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 of 11 words with no redundancy or fluff. It front-loads the action and outcome efficiently.

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 simple tool with two parameters and annotations, the description is minimal but adequate. It covers the core function but misses context like when to run this (e.g., before package installations) or behavioral notes (e.g., network dependency). Sibling tools exist that do similar apt operations, so additional context would help.

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 description coverage is 50% (notify parameter described in schema). The description adds no parameter information. The 'node' parameter is obvious from context, but the description should at least hint at its purpose or usage format. Fails to compensate for the undocumented parameter.

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 ('Trigger `apt update`') and the outcome ('refresh package indexes'), using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like node_apt_repos_list and node_apt_repos_change by naming the exact command executed.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites (e.g., root access, network connectivity) or typical use cases (e.g., before installing packages).

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