update_dev_task

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the partial update behavior. It explicitly notes for blocked_by that the list is replaced entirely and can be cleared with []. No mention of authorization or side effects, but for a straightforward update, this is sufficient.

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 organized as a docstring with an Args list, front-loading the core behavior. It is somewhat lengthy due to the number of parameters, but each line is necessary given the schema lacks descriptions. It could be slightly more concise but remains clear.

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 15 parameters and a required one, the description covers all parameters with enough detail. There is an output schema, so return values don't need explanation. No explicit error handling or prerequisites, but it's adequate for a partial update tool.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description fully compensates by listing each parameter with meaningful descriptions, including enum values for task_type, priority, and status. It provides additional details like 'slug (task-N)' for task_id and 'replace the dependency list entirely' for blocked_by.

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 'Partially update a dev-task' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_dev_task, get_dev_task, and list_dev_tasks, as update is the only mutation tool for existing 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 description explains that omitted fields are left unchanged, implying a PATCH-like usage. It doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, but the context of siblings makes it clear. The list of parameters indicates that only task_id is required, guiding the agent on minimal input.

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