update_milestone

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond 'edit'. It does not disclose whether the tool performs a partial update (only changing provided fields) or a full replacement, what happens to omitted optional fields, or whether the milestone must already exist. The description carries no extra value over the 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 short sentence, 'Edit a milestone', which is extremely concise and free of unnecessary words. It earns its place as a clear purpose statement, though it sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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?

With six parameters, a missing output schema, and limited annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not clarify update semantics such as whether the 'name' field is always required, whether omitted optional fields are retained or cleared, or what the tool returns. The schema covers parameter meanings but not the behavioral context needed for correct invocation.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description itself adds no parameter semantics, but the schema already provides clear descriptions for each field (e.g., 'name' is the name, 'end_date' is the end date). No additional meaning is needed beyond what the schema offers.

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 'Edit a milestone' clearly states the verb (edit) and resource (milestone), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_milestone, delete_milestone, get_milestone, and list_milestones. It is concise and unambiguous, though it lacks additional scope details.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., milestone must exist), nor does it reference create_milestone for new milestones or get_milestone for reading before updating. No exclusions or contextual hints are given.

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