update_issue

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

Discloses that labels are replaced entirely, a key behavioral nuance. States PATCH semantics. No annotations exist, so description carries full burden; it covers the major behavioral traits but omits details like idempotency, permissions, or reponse format.

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?

Extremely concise: one sentence for core action, one for label risk. Every sentence is necessary and front-loaded. No wasted words.

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 10-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the most critical behaviors (PATCH, label replacement, state, milestone). It lacks detail on assignee vs assignees and default repo/owner, but these are in schema. Reasonably complete given complexity.

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%, so baseline is 3. Description adds value beyond schema by explaining label replacement behavior and state enum context. Other parameters are not elaborated, but the added context elevates it.

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?

Clearly states 'Update one issue by `index`' with PATCH semantics, distinguishing from other issue operations like add_issue_labels and remove_issue_label. The verb+resource+key parameter are explicit.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance (PATCH update) and when-not-to (label change direction to add/remove tools). Also clarifies state values and milestone by ID.

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