cmmn-update_task_status

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

Discloses that it validates transitions and auto-sets timestamps. However, it does not mention error handling for invalid transitions or what the output response is. Given no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does a good job but is not exhaustive.

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?

Concise: three sentences covering purpose, transitions, and tip. No filler. Information is front-loaded with the main purpose, making it easy for an agent to quickly grasp.

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 complexity of CMMN transitions and no output schema, the description provides the essential transition rules and a helpful tip. It could mention the return value or error behavior, but it is largely complete for a mutation tool with this detail.

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 coverage is 100%, providing baseline 3. The description adds value by listing the valid status transitions, clarifying the permissible values for the 'status' parameter beyond the schema's description. The tip also adds context about complete_task, which indirectly informs parameter usage.

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?

Clearly states it updates a task's status with CMMN transition validation. The verb 'updates' combined with 'task status' is specific. It distinguishes from sibling cmmn-complete_task by mentioning it in the tip, providing an alternative for completing tasks.

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 lists valid transitions and provides a tip indicating when to use cmmn-complete_task instead. This gives clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance, and names an alternative tool.

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