bulk_update_acceptance_criteria

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

Annotations indicate destructive and non-idempotent. Description adds crucial details: partial update semantics, exact text matching, atomic failure (no changes if any criterion missing), and return fields. Exceeds annotation coverage.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with main action, no redundant information. Each sentence serves a purpose: action, scope, matching behavior, error handling, return format.

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?

Covers all necessary aspects: what it does, how it handles inputs (matching, atomicity), and what it returns. No missing context given the tool's complexity and schema richness.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions. Description adds matching requirement (exact text) and clarifies boolean meaning. Given high schema coverage, description provides marginal added value.

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?

Clearly states the verb (update), resource (acceptance criteria on a story), and scope (in one operation). Distinguishes from siblings like check_acceptance_criterion (single update) and set_acceptance_criteria (replacement).

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?

Specifies that only listed criteria are modified and others untouched, and describes error behavior if criteria not found. However, does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools for single updates, though it is implied by context.

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