update_project_milestone

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

Annotations already indicate the tool is not read-only (readOnlyHint=false), and the description adds the key detail that `dry_run=true` by default, implying a preview mode. However, it omits what the preview returns and does not elaborate on side effects beyond the schema. The description adds minimal value beyond the annotations and schema.

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 sentence with a second sentence clarifying the default behavior. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and contains no unnecessary words. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Despite a concise description, it lacks important context: no explanation of return values (no output schema), no prerequisites (project/milestone existence), and no details on partial vs full updates. For a mutation tool with 8 parameters and no output schema, the description is insufficient.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the input schema fully documents each parameter. The description does not add additional meaning beyond highlighting the `dry_run` default, which is already in the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the resource ('a project-level milestone'), distinguishing it from group-level milestones and other actions like creation or closure. This specificity helps the agent identify the correct tool among siblings.

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 alternatives (e.g., `update_milestone` for group milestones, `close_project_milestone` for closing). It also lacks prerequisites or context about required permissions or dependencies.

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