update_pull_request

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

Description adds behavioral detail beyond annotations: only changed fields applied, reviewers preserved if omitted. Annotations already indicate idempotent and non-destructive, so description complements well.

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?

One efficient sentence covering what the tool does and key behaviors, no fluff.

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?

Tool is simple update. Schema covers all params. Missing return value info and error handling, but reasonable for this type of tool.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. Description adds minor nuance about reviewer preservation but doesn't explain other param behaviors beyond schema.

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?

Clear verb 'Update' with specific resources: title, description, target branch, or reviewers. Distinguishes from sibling create and merge tools.

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?

Description implies use when modifying an existing PR but no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives like create_pull_request or merge_pull_request.

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