update_task_context

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

Describes merge behavior and conflict failure mode (write fails returning current version+context). No annotations, so description carries full burden. Good disclosure of concurrency logic.

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 sentences, first is concise and front-loaded. Second sentence is dense but well-structured. Could be broken for readability, but minimal overhead.

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?

No output schema, but description covers conflict return behavior. All parameters explained, usage context given. Sufficient for an update tool with clear semantics.

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 100% schema coverage, description adds value: explains expected_version source and default, source default, and context merge semantics. Exceeds bare schema.

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 'Merge keys into a task's persistent context blob' with specific behavior: existing keys preserved, supplied keys added/overwritten. Distinguishes from siblings like update_task.

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?

Explicitly suggests use for passing shared state between delegated agents and recommends using expected_version to guard concurrent writes. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use but provides clear context.

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