yougile_update_string_sticker_state

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description matches this. It adds the fact that state IDs are 12-char hex strings but doesn't disclose side effects like what happens to tasks using the state or whether deleted=true performs a soft-delete.

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?

Single sentence of 12 words, front-loaded with the verb. No filler or redundant content.

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 simple update operation with high schema coverage and annotation flags, the description covers the essentials. It lacks context about which mutable fields are available (though schema provides that) and no output is expected, so completeness is adequate.

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 100%, so all parameters are already documented. The description adds a format hint for stateId that repeats the schema's '12-char hex' text. It provides no additional semantics about required vs optional fields or parameter relationships.

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 action ('Update') and the target resource ('a state of a string sticker'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like yougile_update_string_sticker (updates the sticker itself) and yougile_update_sprint_sticker_state (updates a sprint sticker state). It includes a specific detail about state ID format.

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 explicit when-to-use or alternative guidance is provided. The description implies this tool is for modifying an existing string sticker state but doesn't mention when to prefer create_string_sticker_state or how it relates to other update tools.

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