update_todo_item

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full responsibility. It discloses parameter-specific behaviors such as 'use 0 to unassign' and 'notify the assigned person', but does not mention permissions, reversibility, partial update semantics, or return values.

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 compact and well-structured, with the purpose stated first and parameters listed in an easily scannable format. No filler or redundant information.

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?

Parameter semantics are well covered, but the description lacks broader context such as whether omitted fields are preserved, required permissions, or error behavior. The presence of an output schema mitigates return value explanation but does not cover behavioral semantics.

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 schema has no property descriptions (0% coverage), so the description fully compensates by providing clear semantics for each parameter, including the date format for due_at and the special value 0 for responsible_party_id.

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 'Update an existing to-do item', specifying a concrete verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_todo_item, complete_todo_item, and delete_todo_item.

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?

Usage is implied by the verb 'update', but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like complete_todo_item or delete_todo_item. No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned.

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