ytptube_patch_task

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

The description adds the behavioral context of a partial update, implying only specified fields in 'changes' are modified. This goes beyond the plain 'update' verb and aligns with the readOnlyHint=false annotation. However, no additional behavioral traits (e.g., side effects, validation rules, or whether changes are reversible) are disclosed.

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 a single concise sentence with no redundancy. Every word adds value, and the key differentiator 'partially' is front-loaded before the resource. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simple purpose.

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?

The description is inadequate for a tool with a nested changes object and no output schema. It fails to explain how partial updates behave, whether the 'id' is required, or what constraints apply to the changes. Given the complexity of the input schema, the description should provide more context beyond the bare statement.

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%, and the description does not compensate by explaining the 'id' and 'changes' parameters. The 'partial' keyword gives some semantic hint about the 'changes' object, but the description relies entirely on the schema structure. Given the low coverage, this is insufficient.

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 a scheduled task, with 'partially' indicating it is a patch operation rather than a full replacement. This distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'ytptube_update_task' which likely performs a full update. However, it does not explicitly name the alternative, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'ytptube_update_task' or 'ytptube_create_tasks'. The description does not mention prerequisites, appropriate contexts, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision-making support.

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