update_task_attachments

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only states the basic action (add/remove) but does not disclose behavior like whether both add and remove can be done in one call, order of operations, required permissions, or side effects. Minimal transparency.

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 short sentence, which is concise, but it is underspecified for a tool with 5 parameters and no annotations. Every sentence should add value; this one only states the obvious purpose without supporting details.

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 no output schema, no annotations, low schema coverage, and a complex mutation operation, the description is completely inadequate. An agent cannot determine parameter formats, required fields, or expected behavior from this description alone.

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 40%, but the description adds no parameter information. It does not explain what the 'add' array of objects contains, what the 'remove' array expects, or how 'Space' and 'Organization' scope the action. The description fails to compensate for missing schema descriptions.

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 tool adds or removes task attachments, which is a specific verb-resource combination. It distinguishes from sibling tools like update_task or add_task_dependency, as none of those mention attachments.

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 vs alternatives. For example, it does not mention that this tool is for modifying attachments specifically, while update_task might handle other fields. No when/not-when scenarios are provided.

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