atualizar_subtarefa

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only states that it updates fields. It does not clarify whether it performs a partial update (only changing provided fields) or a full replacement, nor does it mention effects on unspecified fields, validation rules, or potential side effects like modifying timestamps.

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, complete sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource, then lists the updatable fields. It is efficient and free of fluff, though it could be slightly more explicit about usage constraints within the same sentence.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It fails to explain the update semantics (partial vs. full), whether at least one field must be provided, or what the response contains. Given the tool's moderate complexity (5 parameters), it should provide more operational context to avoid ambiguous usage.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for all five parameters, each with a clear description of its purpose and format. The tool description lists the same fields without adding new meaning beyond the schema, so it adds minimal value on top of the structured definitions.

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 'Atualiza' (updates) and the resource 'subtarefa' (subtask), and enumerates the specific fields that can be updated (título, descrição, status, data limite). This distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'criar_subtarefa' which creates a new subtask.

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 like 'criar_subtarefa'. The description implies it is for updating an existing subtask but does not state any prerequisites, such as requiring the subtask to already exist or the need to specify at least one field to update.

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