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. It discloses that the update is partial (only given fields change). However, it does not mention required permissions, authentication, rate limits, error handling, or what happens if the task_id is invalid. For a mutation tool, this is minimal but acceptable.

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 two short sentences. The first sentence states the action and fields, the second clarifies the partial update behavior. No extraneous information.

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 description covers purpose and a key behavioral trait. However, it lacks information on return values (no output schema), error handling, and required authentication. Also, the language is Turkish, which may affect usability for a multilingual agent. Given the complexity of 6 parameters and no annotations, the description is adequate but incomplete.

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 description lists the fields that can be updated (başlık, açıklama, öncelik, sprint, son tarih), mapping to the parameter names. However, it does not explain expected formats (e.g., priority as string, due_date as date string) or any constraints. With 0% schema coverage, the description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema's raw names.

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 'günceller' (updates) and resource 'task'ın alanlarını' (task fields). It lists specific fields (başlık, açıklama, öncelik, sprint, son tarih) in parentheses, differentiating it from sibling tools like update_task_status which only updates status.

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 clear context by stating 'Sadece verilen alanlar değişir; gerisi korunur' (Only given fields change; the rest are preserved). This guides the agent to provide only the fields to update. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives like update_task_status.

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