taskguard_update_blocker

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

No annotations provided. Description adds the behavioral insight that open blockers block verification, but does not disclose other traits (e.g., idempotency, required permissions, or side effects of status change).

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, zero waste. Front-loaded main action and adds relevant context about verification dependency.

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 simple update tool with no output schema, description explains when to use and a related consequence. However, lacks detail on input parameters and fails to mention what resolution is for, leaving gaps for a new user.

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 0%. Description does not explain sessionId, blockerId, or resolution fields. The hint to use 'resolved' or 'waived' for status adds some meaning, but fails to guide on the required identifier parameters.

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 tool updates blocker status when resolved or waived. It distinguishes from sibling taskguard_add_blocker by focusing on updates, and provides context linking open blockers to taskguard_verify_done.

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 when to call: when a blocker is resolved or waived. Implicitly excludes creation via sibling name, but does not explicitly state when not to use (e.g., for opening a blocker).

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