updateIssueCategory

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

The annotation readOnlyHint: false indicates a write operation, which aligns with 'Update'. However, the description adds nothing beyond that—it does not disclose side effects, permission requirements, idempotency, or what happens to existing data. Since the annotation carries the only behavioral signal, the description contributes minimal value.

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, so it is concise in length, but it is under-specified rather than efficiently structured. It omits all actionable detail, making it more of a placeholder than a useful definition. Brevity here results from absence, not careful editing.

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 tool with two parameters (one nested), a required write operation, and no output schema, this description is grossly incomplete. It does not explain what fields can be updated, whether the update is partial or full, what the response looks like, or any constraints. An agent would be unable to invoke this tool correctly based on the description alone.

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 0%, meaning all parameters are undocumented in the schema itself. The description offers no explanation of pathParams (format, issueCategoryId) or bodyParams (issue_category object with name and assigned_to_id). The agent has no semantic guidance beyond raw property names.

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 'Update issue category' is a near-verbatim restatement of the tool name 'updateIssueCategory', offering no additional detail about the operation. It fails to differentiate from sibling tools like createIssueCategory or deleteIssueCategory, and provides no specifics about what updating entails.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus other category-related operations. No mention of prerequisites (e.g., that the category must already exist), no comparison to alternatives, and no context about typical use cases. The agent receives no direction on selection.

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