update_swimlane

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It explains partial update ('only fields you pass are changed'), validation before write (invalid call modifies nothing), and the return format on success. It doesn't detail error responses for non-existent swimlanes or other failures, but is otherwise transparent.

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: first sentence states purpose, second covers behavior, third provides validation rule, fourth gives alternatives and return format. Every sentence serves a clear function with no redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (3 parameters, update operation, no output schema), the description covers most needed aspects: purpose, usage guidance, behavior, param semantics, and alternatives. It lacks explicit mention of error responses for non-validation errors (e.g., when swimlane doesn't exist), leaving a minor gap.

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 coverage is 100%, so base is 3. The description adds value by explaining the partial update behavior and the validation rule requiring at least one additional field, which goes beyond the schema's field descriptions. This helps the agent understand parameter interplay.

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 an existing Kanboard swimlane'), the resource ('swimlane'), and specifies that it is a partial update. It also distinguishes from sibling tools like move_swimlane and delete_swimlane, leaving no ambiguity about its purpose.

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 explicitly tells when not to use this tool (not for reordering, use move_swimlane; otherwise use delete_swimlane) and provides a critical condition: at least one field besides swimlane_id must be provided, else VALIDATION_ERROR. This guidance helps the agent decide correctly.

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