update_task

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Update task details' and does not explain whether it performs a partial or full update, whether status transitions are validated, what happens to omitted fields, or what the response contains.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is concise, but it is also too terse to add meaningful information beyond the tool name, which is why it does not earn a 5.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and multiple related sibling tools, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not mention update semantics, effects on other task operations, whether task_id must be a valid existing task, or how partial updates are handled.

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 100% parameter description coverage, so the tool description need not restate parameter meanings. The schema's descriptions are minimal but understandable ('New tags', 'New title', etc.), and the enum for status is self-explanatory, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Update task details' clearly identifies the operation (update) and the target resource (task), which distinguishes it from creation, completion, and claim tools. However, it is somewhat generic in not specifying what 'details' means without the schema.

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 like complete_task, claim_task, or update_epic. There is no mention of prerequisites, conditions, or situations where a different tool would be more appropriate.

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