kommo_update_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the operation types (rename/reorder/recolor) but does not reveal side effects, required permissions, idempotency, or error behavior if the stage is missing. This leaves significant gaps for an AI agent.

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?

A single sentence that is concise and front-loaded. It avoids unnecessary words, though the use of slashes might be slightly ambiguous. Overall, it earns its place.

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 the tool has 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It only covers three parameter meanings and omits usage context, behavioral traits, and return behavior. The agent would have significant uncertainty.

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 maps three optional parameters (name, sort, color) to their respective actions, providing meaning beyond the raw schema. However, it does not explain the required parameters (pipeline_id, status_id) or any constraints. With 0% schema coverage, the description partially compensates but is incomplete.

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 tool updates an existing stage by renaming, reordering, or recoloring it. The verb 'renomeia/reordena/recolore' combined with 'etapa existente' specifies the action and resource, and distinguishes it from sibling 'kommo_create_status' which creates a new stage.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like creating a new stage. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as the stage needing to exist, or when renaming vs reordering vs recoloring is appropriate.

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