update_entity

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

No annotations provide safety profile, and the description only says 'Update,' which implies mutation. It doesn't disclose partial-update behavior, null semantics, permission requirements, or effects on related fields. The parameter names hint at these, but the description itself carries the burden and fails to elaborate.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded, no fluff. It is concise but perhaps too terse for a 16-parameter mutation tool; still, it earns high marks for brevity.

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?

For a complex mutation tool with no annotations and many optional fields, a one-line description is insufficient. It doesn't discuss update semantics, which fields can be combined, or special behaviors. Output schema exists, so return format doesn't need explanation, but usage context is still missing.

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 100% (all 16 parameters have descriptions), so baseline is 3. The tool description adds no parameter-level detail beyond what 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 uses a specific verb ('Update') and resource ('a project, portfolio, or goal'), clearly identifying the affected entity types. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from related entity mutators like update_entity_settings or update_entity_metrics, so purpose is clear but sibling differentiation is weak.

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 update_issue or update_entity_settings. No exclusions or prerequisites. Only the generic capability is stated.

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