update_todo

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only states 'Update' without explaining side effects, permissions required, error handling, or that only provided fields are modified. This omission leaves the agent unaware of potential risks or constraints.

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 of 15 words, concise and front-loaded with the action and resource. It wastes no words, though it could benefit from slightly more detail without becoming verbose.

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 complexity of 6 parameters, no schema descriptions, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, partial update semantics, or validation rules, leaving agents with insufficient context for correct invocation.

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 0%, so the description should add meaning beyond parameter names. It merely lists the fields that can be updated, which are already visible in the schema. No format, allowed values, or behavioral context is provided for parameters like due_date or status_id.

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 tool updates an existing to-do and lists the updatable fields (subject, description, status, priority, due date). It uses the verb 'Update' and specifies the resource, distinguishing it from unrelated siblings like get_todo or search_todos, though it does not mention that the update is partial.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like complete_task (which changes status to completed) or create_todo for new items. The description does not specify 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.