yougile_update_task

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

Annotations already set destructiveHint=true, but the description adds meaningful behavioral details: how to remove deadline/timer by passing {deleted:true} and how to soft-delete via 'deleted=true'. This goes beyond the structured fields, though it doesn't discuss reversibility or side effects in depth.

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 three sentences, front-loading the primary purpose and then compactly listing supported changes and special deletion patterns. Every sentence contributes useful information without redundancy.

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 large parameter count and rich schema, the description provides a concise overview and highlights the non-obvious deletion semantics. It doesn't cover return values or error conditions, but those are not essential for an update operation and are partially covered by schema annotations. Overall, it is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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% with descriptions for all 12 parameters, but the description adds semantic value beyond the schema by explaining the 'deleted' pattern for clearing fields and explicitly noting 'columnId' means move. This clarifies the intended usage of ambiguous schema options.

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 begins with a clear verb+resource pair: 'Update a task' and immediately enumerates the mutable fields including the special semantics of 'columnId (move)'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_task or update_column.

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?

The description clearly implies the tool is for modifying existing tasks, listing the editable aspects. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives, but the context is unambiguous given the tool name and field list. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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