task_update

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It only says 'update' but doesn't disclose if it is destructive, idempotent, or has side effects like status change triggers. No error conditions or authorization requirements mentioned.

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 single sentence, front-loaded with key fields. Could be improved by listing fields inline, but no extra fluff.

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?

With 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description misses return values, error handling, required id, and completely omits context_json. Inadequate for fully understanding the tool.

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 17% (only blocker has a description). The description maps 'status, progress, blocker, or notes' to parameters, but 'notes' is actually 'description'. It omits 'context_json' entirely, so adds some but incomplete meaning.

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 task status, progress, blocker, or notes', specifying the action and resources. It distinguishes from siblings like task_create (create), task_list (list), task_claim (claim), etc.

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 vs alternatives, no prerequisites mentioned (e.g., task must exist), and no exclusions provided.

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