Update Shortcut Milestone

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'update fields' and fails to mention the required confirm parameter (CONFIRM_WRITE), archive behavior, dry_run support, or any irreversible effects. This is a serious transparency gap for a mutation tool.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, but for a tool with 10 parameters and important confirmation/archive semantics, it is severely under-specified. This is not appropriate conciseness; it is a gap in 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?

The tool is complex (10 parameters, mutation with confirm and dry_run, no annotations, no output schema), yet the description provides only the most basic purpose. It fails to convey the confirmation workflow, safety mechanisms, or field semantics, making it wholly inadequate for correct 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?

Schema description coverage is only 10% (just the confirm parameter), and the tool description provides no explanation of the 10 parameters. It does not mention fields like name, state, archived, categories, or completed_at_override, so the agent has little guidance beyond raw parameter 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 fields on an existing Shortcut milestone' clearly identifies the action (update), the resource (Shortcut milestone), and distinguishes it from create/delete/get sibling tools. It is specific and unambiguous about what the tool does.

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 phrase 'existing Shortcut milestone' implies the tool is for modifying an already-created milestone, but it offers no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over create_milestone, delete_milestone, or update_epic. Usage context is implied rather than stated.

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