Github Update Release

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

The description adds non-obvious behavior beyond the annotations: only supplied fields are sent, so partial edits are safe, and publishing again falls through to this tool but does not send make_latest. These are exactly the edge cases an agent would otherwise discover only after a mistake. No contradiction with annotations.

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 about 70 words, front-loads the core behavior, and every sentence earns its place: purpose, patch semantics, an exclusion, an alternative workflow, and a skill pointer. There is no filler.

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 7-parameter mutation with an output schema and annotations, the description covers the core call, the patch behavior, the make_latest limitation, and how to move the latest badge. It could still explicitly describe draft/prerelease semantics, but the schema types and output schema cover much of the remaining context.

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 only 43%, and the description compensates with a global patch semantic: 'Only the fields supplied are sent.' It gives concrete examples for title and notes. However, draft and prerelease still lack explanatory text beyond their boolean type, so it does not fully close the coverage gap.

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 opens with a specific verb and object: 'Changes a published release in place,' making it clear this edits an existing release rather than creating or deleting one. It also distinguishes itself from github_create_release by noting that make_latest is only settable there, and from delete/publish flows for moving the latest badge.

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 routes make_latest to github_create_release and tells the agent to delete and recreate the release (or use the GitHub UI) when moving the latest badge. The partial-update sentence also clarifies the common correction use case: change the title without wiping notes.

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