update_task

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says 'Update a task's basic fields or status.' It does not disclose whether unspecified fields remain unchanged, whether the task must exist, or any error behavior. The mutation aspect is implied but not elaborated.

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, concise sentence with no redundant wording. It effectively communicates the core purpose without unnecessary details.

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 has 5 parameters and no output schema, so the description should explain what a successful update returns (if anything) or any important behavioral side effects. It does neither. While the schema covers parameters, the description fails to provide crucial context for safe invocation, such as partial update behavior.

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 provides detailed descriptions for all 5 parameters, so coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond the generic phrase 'basic fields or status,' which adds little value over the schema.

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 action ('Update') and resource ('a task'), and mentions 'basic fields or status' which covers the schema's parameters. It distinguishes from siblings like list_tasks and create_task by virtue of the 'update' verb, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus create_task or list_tasks. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as needing an existing task_id, or when this tool is preferred over creating a new task.

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