update_release

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

With no annotations, the description adds value by disclosing the tagName requirement and the specific 500 error if omitted. However, it oversimplifies by implying only releaseUuid and tagName are always required, while the schema shows title, owner, and project are also required. It does not cover authentication, permissions, or side effects like field overwriting.

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 two sentences, with the purpose front-loaded and the critical requirement and usage tip efficiently combined. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 of 7 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description covers the essential purpose, a critical requirement, an error case, and a helpful hint to fetch current values. It leaves some ambiguity about partial updates, but the schema's required fields mitigate that gap.

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?

The input schema already describes all parameters with 100% coverage, so the description's added emphasis on releaseUuid and tagName as always required, plus the error consequence for tagName, provides extra semantic insight. It also clarifies which fields are updatable, going beyond the schema's simple field descriptions.

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 an existing release's title, description, tag association, or pre-release flag, which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_release and delete_release by focusing on modifying an existing release.

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 explicitly advises using get_release to fetch current values before updating, which is clear contextual guidance. It also highlights the mandatory tagName requirement and its error consequence, though it does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools like create_release or mention when not to use it.

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