Update an item's text and/or completion

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

Discloses non-atomic behavior (separate requests) and return format ({id, text, status}). With no annotations, it carries the full burden, and covers the critical behavioral aspect of update ordering and atomicity.

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, no wasted words, front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Provides return shape and non-atomicity warning despite no output schema. Could mention prerequisites (item must exist) or error handling, but overall covers the essential context for a simple update tool.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description compensates by explaining that text and completed are optional (pass one or both). However, it does not explain the required parameters list_id and item_id beyond their existence.

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 it updates an item's text and/or completion status, specifying the resource (item) and action (update). It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_item and remove_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?

Provides explicit guidance on which parameters to pass ('text, completed, or both') and warns about non-atomicity when both are provided. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but covers key usage conditions.

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