update_release

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explicitly states PATCH behavior (only provided fields change) and warns about tag_name. Lacks details on permissions or side effects, but sufficient for a patch operation.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with core action, then details, then guidance. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 9 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, the description covers key behaviors, parameter details, and critical warnings. Lacks description of return value, but that is optional since no output schema.

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%, but description adds meaning: clarifies that id is numeric and not tag name, notes body supports Markdown, explains tag_name renames the tag. This enriches 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 it updates a release by numeric id via PATCH, lists editable fields like name, body, draft, prerelease, tag_name, target_commitish. This distinguishes it from sibling tools such as create_release, list_releases, etc.

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 tells users to get the id from list_releases or get_release_by_tag first, and warns about tag_name renaming the Git tag. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool, but the context is clear.

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