update-task-list

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Update the name' without mentioning permissions, side effects, or behavior when the list does not exist. This is minimal for a mutation tool.

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 one sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and contains no filler. It is highly concise while conveying the essential action.

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 tool has only two required parameters and no output schema, so its simplicity lowers the need for extensive context. However, the description could mention expected outcome or error handling, though the existing reference to 'existing task list' provides some prerequisite context.

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 already provides descriptions for both listId and displayName, achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema field names, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the action ('Update the name') and the specific resource ('an existing task list'), with the qualifier 'top-level container' distinguishing it from task-level operations. It is specific and differentiates well from siblings like update-task.

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 'existing task list' implies this is for renaming an already-created list, and 'top-level container' clarifies scope, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives or exclusions. The intended use is reasonably clear but not formally contrasted with siblings.

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