update_task

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

Description adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations already provide (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true). It does not disclose side effects, such as whether updates are irreversible or what happens to extra_fields.

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 sentence, which is concise, but it lacks structure and critical details. It could be expanded to list updatable fields without losing conciseness.

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 the tool has 4 parameters, a nested object, no output schema, and no enum values, the description is woefully inadequate. It fails to explain required fields, allowed actions/statuses, or the purpose of extra_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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate but only says 'Update fields'. No meaning provided for parameters action, status, task_id, or extra_fields. The agent has no idea what values are allowed or how extra_fields behaves.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Update' and the resource 'existing Planhat task', distinguishing it from create/delete/list siblings. It is specific and unambiguous.

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 other update_* tools (e.g., update_ticket) or alternatives. No context about prerequisites or when not to use it.

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