Goals Update Goal Priorities

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, openWorldHint=true. The description adds that it 'may create or update Monarch data,' which confirms mutation but doesn't specify what gets created/updated or any other behavioral traits (e.g., permissions, rate limits).

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; the first is clear, the second is vague ('may create or update Monarch data'). The description is concise but not optimally structured to front-load key information.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and moderate complexity, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what 'goal_ids' represents, how priorities are updated, or what the response contains, leaving gaps for the agent.

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 50% (2 of 4 parameters have descriptions). The description does not explain any parameters beyond the schema. 'goal_ids' and 'session_path' lack explanations, which the description could have provided.

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 title and description clearly state the action ('update goal priorities') and the resource (goals). The description adds 'This may create or update Monarch data,' which specifies the effect. It distinguishes from other goal tools (e.g., create, delete) but could be more specific about what 'priorities' entails.

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 like goals_set_goal_budget_amount or goals_update_goal. No prerequisites, side effects, or when-not-to-use information provided.

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