zyta_expedientes_tareas_update

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only mentions PATCH (partial update) and gives an example, but does not explain authorization requirements, idempotency, side effects (e.g., modifies only provided fields), or error cases.

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 very short (one sentence plus endpoint) and to the point, but it omits important details. Structure is adequate for a simple tool but not fully informative.

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?

With 7 parameters, no output schema, and low schema coverage (14%), the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, validation constraints beyond the schema, or how the update behaves with missing fields.

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?

Description does not clarify parameter semantics beyond the schema. Only expedienteId has a schema description; other parameters like titulo, prioridad, fechaVencimiento lack explanation. The example suggests estado can be set to 'completada', but no further meaning is added.

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 action is to update a task, with an example (completada) and the HTTP method/endpoint pattern PATCH …/tareas/:id. It easily distinguishes from sibling tools like create, delete, list.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to update vs. create or list). No prerequisites or context about typical usage are provided.

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