Update task

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. The '(partial)' qualifier usefully signals partial-update semantics, but there is no disclosure of auth/permission requirements, whether unspecified fields are preserved or cleared, or how the account/tasklistId scoping affects the operation.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no waste. It is appropriately sized for a short description, though it is arguably terse given a seven-parameter mutation tool.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description does too little. It omits the account/tasklistId scoping, permission requirements, and any confirmation of what the call returns, leaving an agent with only field names already present in the schema.

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 every parameter is already documented in the schema, including the RFC3339 due format, the status enum, and the tasklistId default. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb (update) and resource (a task) and enumerates the mutable fields (title, notes, due date, status). It is clear what the tool does, though it does not distinguish itself from the sibling google_tasks_complete, which also sets status to completed.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. An agent must infer from the '(partial)' hint that unspecified fields are left unchanged, and nothing routes it between this tool and google_tasks_complete, google_tasks_create, or google_tasks_update_list.

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