update_milestone

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses a key behavioral constraint (cannot modify closed milestones), which is helpful for a mutation tool. However, it does not mention permissions, reversibility, or what happens when trying to update a closed milestone, leaving some transparency gaps.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the primary purpose and adds the key constraint. Every word earns its place with 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?

For a simple tool with fully documented parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate. It covers the primary action, the scope (title/description), and a critical limitation (closed milestones). It could arguably mention error behavior, but nothing essential is missing.

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 additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides for milestone_id, title, and description. It is essentially redundant with the 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?

The description clearly states the tool's function: 'Update a milestone's title or description.' This is a specific verb-action on a resource, and the additional constraint 'Cannot modify closed milestones' differentiates it from other milestone-related tools like create_milestone or reopen_milestone.

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 implies usage for updating milestone fields but does not explicitly name alternatives or describe when to choose this over sibling tools like reopen_milestone. The closed-milestone restriction provides a clear exclusion but no positive guidance.

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