update_task

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry the full burden. It only implies a mutation ('Update') and gives a string format hint for completed_str. It does not disclose whether updates are incremental, overwriting, or trigger side effects (e.g., audit logs). Minimal behavioral context.

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?

Very concise (2 sentences) but the first sentence is a tautology ('Update a task'). The second sentence is useful but too sparse. Could be restructured to list all updatable fields without adding much length.

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?

For a 5-parameter tool with no schema descriptions and no annotations, the description fails to cover the full scope of updates. Although an output schema exists (not shown), the description does not mention what the tool returns or any additional behavioral context. Poor completeness.

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 description must compensate. It explains the format for completed_str but ignores name, notes, due_date, and task_id. Adds value for only one of five parameters.

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 states 'Update a task' which is a tautology with the name, and then focuses only on the completed_str parameter. It fails to convey that the tool can update multiple fields (name, notes, due_date). Given sibling tools like update_subtask, update_activity_code, etc., it does not distinguish itself.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., create_task, patch versions). No context on prerequisites, idempotency, or when not to use it.

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