yougile_update_sprint_sticker_state

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

The destructiveHint annotation already indicates the operation may be destructive, but the description adds no additional context about side effects (e.g., what happens to stickers using the state when it is renamed or soft-deleted). It only repeats the hex ID format, which is already in the schema.

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—two short sentences that immediately state the action and a key constraint. No wasted words.

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 schema fully documents parameters and annotations indicate destructive potential, the description is minimally sufficient for invocation. However, it misses important context about the consequences of changing or deleting a state, which would be helpful for a mutating tool with no output schema.

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 100% with clear descriptions for all five parameters, so the schema carries the burden. The description's note about State IDs being 12-char hex strings adds no value beyond the schema's own parameter description.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Update a state of a sprint sticker') and clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like create_sprint_sticker_state and update_string_sticker_state. It also provides a useful detail about State IDs being 12-char hex strings.

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?

The usage is implied: you use this tool to update an existing sprint sticker state. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites mentioned.

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