update_issue

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that all actions are batched into a single atomic on-chain transaction, which is key behavioral information. Could mention more about side effects.

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, front-loaded with purpose, every sentence earns its place. No fluff.

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 tool complexity (9 parameters, multiple action types) and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It explains required vs optional, atomic batch processing, and ties to sibling tools.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds value by grouping parameters into categories (state, labels, assignees) and clarifying the requirement that at least one action must be specified.

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?

Description clearly states the purpose: to change an issue's state, labels, or assignees. It uses specific verbs and resources, and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_issue and comment_on_issue.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this when you need to change...' and notes that at least one action must be specified. It lists required and optional parameters but does not provide explicit when-not-to-use scenarios.

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