everhour_update_task

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. The description only says 'update an existing task' without revealing whether it performs a partial or full update, whether unspecified fields are left untouched, whether permissions are needed, or what the return value is. There is zero behavioral context beyond the schema's field list.

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 short sentence, which is concise but not appropriately sized for a tool with 7 parameters. It lacks front-loaded usage information and provides no additional structure. While it wastes no words, it under-specifies the tool's purpose and usage.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and 7 parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, side effects, or update semantics. The minimal text is sufficient only for the simplest interpretation of an update operation, leaving significant gaps for an agent selecting or invoking the tool correctly.

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 100%, so all seven parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning or context for the parameters. It simply states the action without elaborating on how to use the parameters, earning the baseline score of 3.

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 verb 'update' and resource 'existing task in Everhour', which distinguishes it from create/delete siblings. However, it does not explicitly distinguish it from the sibling 'update_task_estimate', which is a more specific update tool. It is not a tautology and provides a clear basic purpose.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_task_estimate or create_task. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or preferred contexts. The usage is only implied by the tool's name and generic verb.

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