update_issue

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

No annotations provided, so description should disclose behavioral traits like partial update behavior, idempotency, or error conditions. It only says 'update mutable fields' without details on side effects or required permissions.

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 sentence with no wasted words, but it lacks sufficient detail. Conciseness is not an excuse for missing essential information.

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 (9 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is severely lacking. It does not explain return values, error handling, or the effect of partial updates, making it inadequate for reliable tool invocation.

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?

With only 33% schema description coverage, the description should compensate by explaining key parameters. It does not add any parameter information beyond the schema, leaving most parameters (name, state, labels, priority, assignees, description_html) unexplained.

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 the tool updates mutable fields of an existing issue, which distinguishes it from create_issue (creation) and list_project_issues (listing). However, it could be more specific about which fields are mutable.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to use create_issue for new issues or list_project_issues for reading. No prerequisites or context provided.

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