Skip to main content
Glama
vmware-skills

vmware-avi

by vmware-skills
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

upgrade_ako_config

Preview an AKO Helm upgrade for the avi-system release and apply it only after confirmation; reuses values and returns blast radius.

Instructions

[WRITE] Apply an AKO Helm upgrade to the avi-system release.

Finds the avi-system release automatically and upgrades the Broadcom OCI chart with --reuse-values. Without confirm=True this only previews: it returns blast_radius (release, the chart and app version it is on, revision and status, the chart it would move to) plus helm_dry_run, the output of helm upgrade --dry-run, and changes nothing. Show that to the user and get their explicit decision. Do not set confirm=True on your own because the user asked earlier: they have not seen what it changes yet.

Refused with confirm=True: a failing dry-run (the real upgrade would fail too), a release with another helm operation pending, and a release whose status cannot be read. Helm output has credential values blanked to <redacted> by this skill. Run diff_ako_config first to review the change.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confirmNoFalse (default) returns the blast radius and changes nothing. True applies it.
dry_runNoDeprecated alias; removed in the next minor release. The old contract applied only with dry_run=false and confirmed=true; dry_run=true holds even when confirm=True.
confirmedNoDeprecated alias for confirm; removed in the next minor release. confirmed=False holds even when confirm=True.
chart_versionNoPin the chart, e.g. "1.11.1". Empty = registry latest, resolved at apply time, so it can differ from the preview.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv2.4.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Explicitly describes the preview mode (returns blast_radius and helm_dry_run, changes nothing), the refusal conditions (failing dry-run, pending helm op, unreadable status), and that credentials are blanked to <redacted>. This is far beyond what the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, non-idempotent) convey.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Well-structured with the write marker, preview behavior, and refusal conditions front-loaded. Slightly lengthy but every section earns its place; the anti-pattern warning about confirm=True is valuable and not wasteful.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive-adjacent write tool with no output schema, the description covers preview output shape, refusal paths, credential redaction, and the recommended prerequisite. Nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters including confirm, dry_run, confirmed, and chart_version. The description reinforces the confirm semantics but doesn't add syntax details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (Apply an AKO Helm upgrade) and resource (avi-system release, Broadcom OCI chart), and clearly marks it as a WRITE operation vs. sibling read tools like get_ako_config and diff_ako_config.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit when/when-not guidance: it says to run diff_ako_config first, explains preview vs. apply semantics via confirm=True, and warns not to set confirm=True on the user's behalf. Routes to the right sibling (diff_ako_config) explicitly.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools