zentao_update_build

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It merely states 'modify version' without disclosing side effects, permission requirements, or whether the operation is destructive. The schema shows updates fields but the description adds no behavioral context.

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 short sentence, which is concise but underspecified. It sacrifices essential information for brevity, making it less helpful for an AI agent to understand the tool's purpose and usage.

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 complexity (7 parameters, update operation) and lack of output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the tool does beyond 'modify version', lacks context on required fields beyond id, and fails to connect with sibling tools (e.g., create/delete build).

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% with each parameter having a Chinese description. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline is appropriate as the schema already documents the parameters adequately.

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 '修改禅道版本' is a minimal Chinese phrase that translates to 'Modify ZenTao version'. It vaguely indicates an update operation but does not explicitly state it updates a build resource, relying on the tool name for disambiguation. It is not a tautology but lacks specificity to differentiate from other update tools like zentao_update_bug or zentao_update_plan.

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 (e.g., zentao_create_build or zentao_delete_build). There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or conditions for usage, leaving the agent to infer from the tool name alone.

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