tasks_update

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'update' without mentioning permission requirements, side effects, whether unspecified fields remain unchanged, or what the response contains. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It efficiently communicates the core purpose and key affected fields.

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?

This is a complex 13-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, yet the description only names a few property categories. It omits operational context such as status validity, task_type requirements, date/time units, and partial-update behavior, making it incomplete for reliable use.

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%, so the schema already documents all 13 parameters with descriptions. The tool description adds no new parameter semantics beyond listing a few field categories that are already present in the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 'update' and the resource 'existing ClickUp task's properties', and lists common fields like name, description, assignees, status, and dates. It distinguishes from tasks_create and tasks_delete but does not explicitly differentiate from tasks_update_bulk, though the singular 'existing task' implies a single-task operation.

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 given on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as tasks_update_bulk or tasks_create. There are no stated prerequisites, exclusions, or conditions for use beyond the implied 'update an existing task'.

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