update_task

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Update a task,' omitting details like idempotency, error handling, permissions required, or what the output schema contains. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 extremely concise (one short sentence), but it is under-specified. While front-loaded, it fails to convey necessary information, making it inefficient rather than effective.

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 4 parameters, no annotations, no schema descriptions, and an output schema, the description provides almost no context. It does not explain what can be updated, what the output is, or any constraints.

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%, so the description should compensate by explaining parameters. It does not mention body, due_date, or fields_json, leaving their meaning and usage entirely unclear.

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 a task' states the verb and resource but is vague and does not differentiate from sibling tools like complete_task or assign_task. It lacks specificity about which aspects of a task are updated.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description gives no indication of when to use this tool over alternatives such as complete_task, assign_task, or snooze_task, which are all among sibling tools.

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