checkvist_update_task

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Update an existing task' with no information about side effects, whether omitted fields are cleared, whether it can move tasks, or how it interacts with other task properties. This is essentially no disclosure beyond the tool name.

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 five-word clause, which is concise but severely under-specified for a tool with 10 parameters and no sibling differentiation. The brevity sacrifices utility, making it more under-specification than appropriate conciseness.

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's complexity (10 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is far too thin. It does not explain the semantics of updating a task, such as whether fields are replaced or merged, the effect of required IDs, or common use cases. The schema documents parameters, but the overall operation remains unclear.

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 input schema already documents all 10 parameters. The description adds no parameter-level insight beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a clear verb ('Update') and resource ('existing task'), but it is nearly a tautology of the tool name and does not distinguish this update tool from siblings like create_task, close_task, or set_repeating_task. The word 'existing' adds minimal scope, but no details about what can be updated.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_task, close_task, or move_task. There is no mention of required parameters like checklist_id and task_id, nor any note about partial versus full updates.

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