update_label

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions PATCH semantics, color format, and id type, but does not disclose potential side effects, authorization requirements, rate limits, or response behavior (no output schema). Some behavioral context is missing.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, yet includes all essential information: update operation, id specification, field list, color format, and id source. No extraneous 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?

Given the tool has no output schema and 6 parameters, the description covers purpose, usage (PATCH semantics, id, color format), and parameter hints. It lacks explanation of return value or error handling, but is largely complete for a simple update operation.

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%, but the description adds significant value beyond the schema: clarifying that id is number not name, explaining PATCH semantics, specifying color format, and advising to get id from list_labels. Defaults for owner and repo are implied from environment variables.

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 updates a label by id, lists updatable fields (name, color, description), and distinguishes from siblings like create_label and delete_label. The verb 'update' and resource 'label' are specific.

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 provides usage guidance: 'Provide any of name/color/description (PATCH semantics)' and 'Get the id from list_labels.' It implies partial updates and how to obtain the required id, but does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives among siblings.

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