ako_config_upgrade

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

The description adds context about the dry_run safety feature and indicates it is a write operation. Annotations show destructiveHint=false and readOnlyHint=false, which is consistent. However, it does not disclose potential side effects like downtime or required permissions.

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 concise and well-structured. It front-loads the purpose with '[WRITE]' and a clear action, then efficiently explains the safety default and parameter details without unnecessary words.

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 one parameter and a safety mechanism, the description covers the essential aspects. It could be more complete by mentioning if the operation is long-running or triggers restarts, but overall it is sufficient.

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 has no description for the dry_run parameter, but the description provides a clear explanation: 'Preview changes without applying (default true).' This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 it is a write operation that applies an AKO Helm upgrade, which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like ako_config_show or ako_config_diff, but does not explicitly differentiate from other write tools like ako_sync_force.

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 guidance on using dry_run for preview and setting it to false to apply, along with a safety note about double confirmation. However, it does not mention when not to use this tool or suggest alternative tools for different tasks.

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