update_task_context

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

The description discloses the merge behavior (keys added/overwritten, existing preserved) but omits potential side effects, size limits, or permission requirements. With no annotations, the description carries full burden and falls short of complete 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 two sentences, front-loading the core behavior and then providing a use case. No extraneous words; every sentence adds value.

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?

The description covers purpose and use case but lacks details on output, error handling, and constraints. Given no output schema and no annotations, more context is needed for complete understanding.

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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds no additional parameter details beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'merge' and the resource 'task's persistent context blob', and distinguishes from siblings like 'update_task' by focusing specifically on context merging.

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?

The description explicitly suggests using this tool to 'pass shared state between delegated agents instead of re-describing context in task descriptions', providing a clear when-to-use scenario. It does not explicitly list alternative tools but gives useful context.

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