odoo_project_update_task

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that the tool updates fields and gives an example, but does not state whether unspecified fields are preserved, whether the update is partial, what happens with an invalid task_id, or any permission requirements. For a mutation tool with no annotations, more is needed.

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 front-loaded with the primary action, followed by a clear Args section. Every sentence adds useful information and there is no filler or repetition of schema details.

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?

The parameter semantics are well covered and an output schema exists, so return values do not need explanation. However, with no annotations, the missing behavioral details such as partial update semantics, error behavior, and permissions leave the description somewhat incomplete for safe autonomous use.

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 schema has 0% description coverage and only exposes types, so the description adds essential meaning: task_id is the project.task ID and values is a field->value dictionary. The example {'stage_id': 3} clarifies the intended usage well, though valid field names are not enumerated.

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 and resource: 'Actualiza campos de una tarea existente'. It also gives a concrete example of changing stage/state, which distinguishes it from sibling create/list tools like odoo_project_create_task and odoo_project_list_tasks.

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 phrase 'tarea existente' makes clear this tool is for modifying already-created tasks, providing a clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool.

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