autotask_update_ticket

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It only discloses that the update is partial ('Only provided fields are changed') but omits details on authentication requirements, rate limits, idempotency, error behavior, or what happens if the ticket is not found. The disclosure is minimal for a mutation tool.

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 with two short sentences. The first sentence front-loads the primary action, and the second adds the key behavioral detail. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 tool's complexity (11 parameters), good schema coverage, and lack of output schema/annotations, the description is adequate but not complete. It covers high-level purpose and partial update, but omits return values, error handling, and prerequisites. It meets minimum viability but has clear gaps.

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 high (82%), so baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that only provided fields are changed (partial update semantics), which is not evident from the schema alone. This extra meaning justifies a 4.

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 ticket record' and specifies 'Only provided fields are changed', distinguishing it from create or read tools. It provides a specific verb and resource, and is unambiguous among siblings.

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 description does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like autotask_create_ticket or autotask_get_ticket_details. It lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use statements, leaving the agent to infer from the name alone.

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