Update Todo

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

The description indicates it is a mutation (consistent with readOnlyHint=false) and specifies partial update behavior ('only the supplied fields are changed'). It also states it returns the modified object. This adds value beyond annotations, though it lacks details on permissions or side effects.

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 somewhat verbose with redundant sentences (e.g., 'Use this to update...' followed by 'Updates the specified...'). It front-loads purpose but could be more concise by removing repetitions.

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 covers the basic purpose, deprecation, and return value, but lacks details on the todo object structure and potential fields. Given the absence of an output schema, more guidance on what the todo object accepts would be helpful.

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 parameters. The description repeats that id, project_id, and todo are required but adds no additional meaning about the todo object's structure or allowed fields, which are unclear from the schema (additionalProperties: true).

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 a ToDo item for a specified Project,' with a specific verb and resource. It also mentions it is deprecated and points to an alternative. However, it conflates 'ToDo' with 'Schedule (Legacy)' which may cause slight confusion.

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 explicitly notes the endpoint is deprecated and advises using '/rest/v1/calendar-items' instead, providing clear guidance on when not to use this tool. It also lists required parameters but does not compare to other update tools for the same resource.

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