update_activity

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only restates parameter names and defaults without disclosing side effects, destruction, permission requirements, or behavior on errors. 'Update' implies mutation, but no further behavioral context is given.

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 front-loaded with the core action, but the parameter list is verbose and repeats schema defaults. Each sentence adds some value, but the overall length could be reduced by omitting obvious descriptions.

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 4 required parameters and an output schema, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain how current_step relates to activity state, what happens after update (e.g., side effects), or how the color impacts the UI. The output schema is present but the description does not reference it, leaving context incomplete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. However, it merely restates parameter names (e.g., 'The ID of the activity to update') without adding meaningful semantics. The color and current_step_color get a bit more context, but overall, the descriptions are shallow and not helpful beyond the 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 states 'Update an activity' clearly, but the mention of 'title and message' is slightly misleading as it includes many other fields. It distinguishes the core action from siblings like start_activity or end_activity, but could be more specific about the resource being updated.

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 the sibling tools (end_activity, send_notifications, start_activity). There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision support for tool selection.

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