akb_todo_update

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

No annotations provided, and the description only states 'update' which implies mutation but offers no details on permissions, side effects, error handling, or whether partial updates are allowed. This is insufficient for safe invocation.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that lists concrete examples. No redundant words or fluff. Efficient for conveying core purpose.

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 7 parameters, low schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It fails to explain return values, error conditions, or how fields interact (e.g., setting due_date without timezone). Agents lack sufficient context for reliable use.

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 description coverage is low (29%). The description lightly maps examples to parameters (e.g., 'mark as done' to status) but does not elaborate on behavior like allowed transitions (open->done only), or how reassign interacts with other fields. The enums are in schema, but description adds minimal 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'update' and resource 'todo', and lists specific update actions like mark done, change priority, reassign, or edit. While it distinguishes from siblings (e.g., akb_todo likely for retrieval), it doesn't explicitly contrast, leaving some ambiguity.

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 alternatives such as akb_todo (possibly for view) or akb_edit (general edit). No mention of 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.