update_task_comment

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

The description lacks behavioral details beyond stating the action. It does not disclose side effects, idempotency, permission requirements, or what happens upon update (e.g., overwrites, timestamps). With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal information.

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 sentence, concise and to the point. It is front-loaded with the action, though it could be slightly more structured with context. Overall, no unnecessary 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 low complexity (3 required parameters, no output schema), the description covers the basic purpose but lacks context such as return values, prerequisites, or when to use. It is minimally complete but leaves gaps for a mutation tool.

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 parameter descriptions already provided. The description adds no additional semantics beyond what the schema offers, achieving the baseline score.

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 uses a specific verb '更新する' (update) and resource 'タスクのコメント' (task comment), clearly stating the action and target. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'create_task_comment' and 'delete_task_comment' by the verb alone.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'create_task_comment' or 'delete_task_comment', nor does it mention prerequisites or context.

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