kaiten_update_select_value

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Update a select value' and provides no information about side effects (e.g., whether changing value text affects cards using it, whether setting condition to 'inactive' disables it), permissions, or reversibility. The description is not misleading, but it discloses essentially nothing beyond the generic action.

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 a single sentence with no filler. It front-loads the purpose ('Update a select value') and adds a minimal qualifier ('for a custom property'). Every word contributes, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 has 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It fails to explain the relationship between property_id and value_id, the effect of the condition enum, or what the response might look like. An agent would need to infer too much about how to invoke this correctly and what to expect.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, but it also doesn't need to since each parameter has a description. No additional semantic context, such as which fields are commonly updated together, is given.

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 states a specific verb ('Update') and a clear resource ('select value for a custom property'), which distinguishes it from custom property operations and other select-value actions like create/delete. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools such as kaiten_create_select_value, but the verb 'update' plus the resource is unambiguous enough for basic purpose identification.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like kaiten_create_select_value, kaiten_delete_select_value, or kaiten_update_custom_property. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as needing an existing select value, nor any exclusions. The agent gets no help deciding between update and create/delete.

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