update-checklist-item

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of explaining behavioral traits. It states what can be changed but omits key details for a write operation: whether it does a partial update or full replacement, authorization needs, idempotency, or what the response contains. This ambiguity leaves significant operational unknowns.

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, efficient sentence that immediately identifies the action and resource. It has no wasted words and is well-structured.

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?

The schema covers all parameters, but the description lacks information about the tool's operational behavior for a write operation (e.g., partial updates, response, prerequisites). Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is adequate for basic understanding but leaves important context gaps.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a modest semantic layer by grouping parameters into 'text content' (displayName) and 'completion status' (isChecked), which helps conceptual mapping but doesn't add meaning beyond the schema's existing descriptions.

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 a specific verb ('Update'), resource ('checklist item (subtask)'), and scope ('changing the text content or completion status'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create-checklist-item and delete-checklist-item by specifying it targets existing items.

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 description implies when to use the tool via 'existing' (not for creating) and 'update' (not for deleting), and the fields it mentions give clear use cases. However, it doesn't explicitly compare with alternatives or state when not to use it, so it's clear but not fully explicit.

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