update_rules

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

With no annotations, the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It mentions downloading and installing but does not disclose whether the update is destructive, if existing rules are overwritten, or if the operation is safe to repeat. The force parameter hints at idempotency but is not explained in context.

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 with 11 words, very concise with no unnecessary information. It effectively communicates the core action but could be slightly expanded for clarity without becoming verbose.

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 existence of sibling tools like check_for_updates and verify_compliance, the description does not explain how the update tool fits into the workflow. It also omits any details about return values or side effects, and the tool is simple enough that more context would be helpful.

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 100% for the only parameter (force). The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides for this parameter. Since the schema already describes it, the baseline is 3.

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?

Clearly states the action (download and install), the resource (latest critical rules), and the source (GitHub). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like check_for_updates or get_rules_summary which check or summarize without updating.

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?

Provides the core usage scenario but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings. It does not state prerequisites or conditions for use, such as requiring a network connection or permissions.

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