todoist_update_task

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states this is an update operation but doesn't mention authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what happens when multiple tasks match a 'task_name' search. The phrase 'full parameter support' is vague and doesn't clarify behavioral aspects like whether updates are partial or complete replacements of task data.

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, efficient sentence that states the core purpose. However, it could be more front-loaded with critical usage information rather than ending with the vague 'full parameter support' phrase. There's no wasted text, but it's arguably too concise given the tool's complexity.

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?

For a mutation tool with 18 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain the batch versus single-task operation modes, doesn't clarify the relationship between 'tasks' array and individual parameters, and provides no information about return values or error handling. The complexity of the input schema demands more descriptive context.

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 all parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds minimal value beyond this - 'full parameter support' vaguely suggests comprehensive updatable fields but doesn't provide specific semantic context that isn't already in the schema descriptions. The baseline of 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb ('Update') and resource ('tasks in Todoist'), and specifies 'full parameter support' which indicates comprehensive functionality. However, it doesn't distinguish this from sibling tools like 'todoist_update_task_labels' or 'todoist_update_project', which are also update operations on Todoist resources.

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. There's no mention of when to use batch operations (via 'tasks' array) versus single-task updates, or when to prefer this over more specialized update tools like 'todoist_update_task_labels'. No prerequisites, exclusions, or context for selection are provided.

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