Edit Tracker entity

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful non-annotation context: this is a PATCH-style partial update where only keys present in body.fields are touched, and it returns the updated entity.

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 terse sentences, front-loaded with the action, then the merge semantics and the return value. No filler, nothing to cut.

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 a deeply nested body schema and no output schema, the description supplies the two things the schema cannot: partial-update semantics and a note that the updated entity is returned. It omits permission/auth requirements, which is the main remaining gap.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the per-key schema text by making explicit the merge semantics of body.fields — only supplied keys change, everything else is left alone — which is the single most important parameter behavior to understand for an edit call.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Edit a Tracker entity'), which is enough to distinguish it from tracker_entities_create/delete and tracker_entities_bulk_update by name. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the sibling tracker_issues_update or bulk_update, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to pick this single-entity edit over tracker_entities_bulk_update, or how it relates to tracker_issues_update. The partial-update behavior is stated, but as a mechanic rather than a usage condition, and no prerequisites (required entity_type/entity_id) are framed as such.

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