update_design_elements

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return format (items array, counts, per-item errors) and batch capability, but does not detail side effects, permission requirements, or atomicity of updates. Adequate but not exhaustive.

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?

Three concise sentences without redundancy. The key purpose is front-loaded, and every sentence adds value—purpose, usage, and response structure.

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 tool has two parameters, full schema coverage, and no output schema. The description explains the response format compensates for the missing output schema. It could mention error handling or idempotency, but is generally complete for an update operation.

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?

All two parameters are fully documented in the schema (100% coverage). The description adds context about array usage but does not enhance understanding of individual parameters beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Update') and resource ('design elements'), mentions array-based operation, and distinguishes from siblings by specifying the target resource. It is clear and unambiguous.

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 implies batch usage ('array-based') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_boards or update_work_items. No exclusions or context are provided.

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