github_pulls_update

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as required permissions, side effects (e.g., whether updating triggers CI checks), rate limits, or idempotency. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient; the description should at least hint at what changes are possible.

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 concise sentence with no extraneous content. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 (mutation with a nested body parameter), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It lacks information about the kind of updates possible (e.g., title, body, state, labels), the response format, and potential errors. A more complete description would help the agent use the tool correctly.

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 100% description coverage, but each parameter description is minimal (just the parameter name). The 'body' parameter is described as 'Request body (JSON object)' without detailing what fields it accepts. The description adds little meaning beyond the schema, so a 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 'Update a pull request' clearly states the action and resource. However, it does not differentiate this tool from siblings like 'github_pulls_update_branch' or 'github_pulls_update_review', which also perform updates on pull requests. A more specific description (e.g., 'Update title, body, state, or other pull request fields') would improve clarity.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'github_pulls_create', 'github_pulls_merge', or 'github_pulls_update_review'. There is no mention of prerequisites, restrictions, or common use cases.

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