update_milestone

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

The description does not add any behavioral context beyond what annotations already convey. It does not disclose partial update semantics, handling of missing IDs, return values, or side effects, even though annotations only provide readOnlyHint and destructiveHint.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the main action. It avoids fluff, but the extreme brevity leaves out necessary context, making it appropriately sized only for an extremely trivial tool, which this is not.

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 an update tool with six parameters and no output schema, the description is critically under-specified. It does not explain which fields can be updated, whether the update is partial or full, or what the response contains, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description had the full responsibility to clarify parameters, but it does not mention any of the six properties (title, external_id, target_date, external_source, project_id, milestone_id). The agent receives no insight into what these fields mean or how they are used during the update.

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 'Update a milestone by ID' clearly states the verb (update) and resource (milestone), and specifies the identifier scope. It is not a tautology and is distinguishable from sibling tools like delete_milestone or retrieve_milestone, though it does not elaborate on what aspects can be updated.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or typical scenarios. The description does not mention exclusions or related tools, leaving the agent to infer context from the tool name alone.

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