Update Worklog

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

The description only states 'Update' which matches the annotation readOnlyHint=false, but adds no further behavioral context such as whether updates are incremental or full replacements, or any side effects. The description could mention that duration, comment, and start are updatable fields.

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?

Single sentence with clear purpose, no redundant words, front-loaded with key action and resource.

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?

Despite good schema coverage and output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not explain the full scope of updates (e.g., duration, comment, start) or how parameters relate. With 5 parameters and an output schema, more context would be beneficial.

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 parameter descriptions. The tool description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Update' and the resource 'worklog entry (spent time record)' in 'Yandex Tracker issue', distinguishing it from sibling tools like issue_add_worklog, issue_delete_worklog, and issue_get_worklogs.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this is for modifying existing entries, while issue_add_worklog is for new ones, nor does it specify prerequisites like requiring an existing worklog ID.

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