Upgrade a plugin

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the HTTP method and authorization class. There is no mention of effects like downtime, version changes, or rollback possibilities. No contradiction with 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 very concise, consisting of two short sentences with no fluff. However, it may be too minimal for adequate understanding, but conciseness itself is well-served.

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?

Despite having an output schema (unseen), the description fails to explain what upgrading entails (e.g., version specification, confirmation of completion). It omits important context for a mutation tool, leaving the agent underinformed.

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%, with body having a description ('Optional JSON compatibility payload...') but no detail on path/pluginId. The description does not add any parameter meaning beyond the schema, leaving the agent to infer the role of pluginId.

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 title and description clearly state 'Upgrade a plugin', using a specific verb and resource. It is distinguishable from sibling tools like install, enable, disable, etc., though no explicit differentiation is provided.

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 lacks any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as prerequisites (plugin installed, enabled) or context (e.g., upgrading to latest version). No when-not or exclusion criteria are mentioned.

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