update_subtask

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the semantics of 'completed_str' but does not address idempotency, side effects, permissions, or whether updating other fields like 'name' has any constraints. The behavior is only minimally described.

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 very concise at 15 words, with the first sentence stating the purpose and the second explaining a key parameter. It is front-loaded and easy to scan. However, it sacrifices completeness for brevity; additional relevant information could be included without becoming verbose.

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 complexity of 4 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and no annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It covers only one parameter's semantics and omits behavioral traits, prerequisites, and the ability to update the name field. The presence of an output schema does not excuse the lack of input parameter guidance.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must add meaning to parameters. It explains 'completed_str' with specific values ('true'/'false') and their effects, which adds value. However, 'task_id', 'subtask_id', and 'name' are not explained in the description, leaving those parameters with no semantic context beyond their names.

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 a subtask.' which matches the tool name. It identifies the action as updating and the resource as subtask. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like 'update_task' except by resource name, and it only highlights the 'completed_str' parameter, missing the 'name' parameter that can also be 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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'create_subtask' or 'delete_subtask'. There are no prerequisites, context, or typical scenarios mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name.

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