wrike_update_custom_field

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely says 'Update an existing custom field', providing no information about permissions, side effects (e.g., impact on existing values when changing type), or whether changes are reversible. This is little more than a restatement of the tool's name.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundancy. It is appropriately sized for a simple update operation, though it may be too terse to fully compensate for the lack of behavioral 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?

This is a mutation tool with 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description provides no information about return values, required permissions, usage context, or limitations, making it significantly incomplete for an agent to understand the full behavior of the tool.

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%, as all five parameters have descriptions in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the action 'Update' and the resource 'existing custom field', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like wrike_create_custom_field and wrike_delete_custom_field. It includes the scope 'existing', so it cannot be confused with creation or deletion.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as wrike_create_custom_field or wrike_delete_custom_field. It lacks prerequisites, exclusions, or examples of appropriate usage, leaving the agent without contextual direction.

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