update_task_notes

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says the tool 'updates' notes and returns a confirmation. It does not mention whether notes are overwritten, any permission requirements, side effects, or idempotency considerations.

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 minimal and well-structured with a clear summary, argument list, and return type. Every sentence adds essential information without unnecessary elaboration, making it highly concise and easy to parse.

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 simple two-parameter tool, the description covers purpose, arguments, and return value. However, it omits operational context such as whether the task must exist, how updating notes interacts with other task fields, or potential error conditions, making it adequate but not complete.

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 0%, but the description explains both parameters: task_id and content, clarifying that content is markdown. This adds meaningful semantics beyond the raw schema, though it stops short of providing detailed formats or examples.

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 'Update notes for a task', identifying the specific verb (update) and resource (task notes). It is unambiguous and distinct from siblings like get_task_notes, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from update_task, which could also modify notes.

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 such as update_task or get_task_notes. It lacks contextual scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without information on usage boundaries.

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