update_checklist

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only says 'update,' implying a mutation, but does not explain whether existing items are overwritten, how autoUpdate behaves, what the return value is, or any permissions needed. 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?

The description is a single, well-structured sentence with no redundant wording. It front-loads the core action and resource, making it easy to quickly understand the tool's 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?

This tool has six parameters and two distinct update modes (manual via itemPath/status and auto via autoUpdate), yet the description is extremely brief. It does not explain how these modes interact, prerequisites, or outcomes. Given no output schema or annotations, more detail is necessary 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?

The input schema covers all six parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description's mention of 'branch context and progress' loosely hints at the autoUpdate and branchName parameters but adds little detail beyond what the schema already provides.

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 identifies the action ('update') and the resource ('checklist items'), and adds contextual basis ('based on branch context and progress') that helps distinguish it from siblings like read_checklist or sign_off_checklist. However, it does not specify whether it updates a single item or the entire checklist, which leaves 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?

The phrase 'based on branch context and progress' implies a use case for updating items when branch information is relevant, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like update_branch_note or read_checklist. No exclusions or alternative references are provided.

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