agloop_update_task

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 mentions 'Auto-sets timestamps' but does not disclose whether the update overwrites or merges fields, what side effects occur, or what the response looks like. The behavioral details are minimal.

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 two concise sentences with no unnecessary words. Each sentence adds valuable information: purpose, updatable fields, auto-timestamp, and access restriction.

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?

Given the tool has three parameters, no annotations, and an output schema not described, the description is too brief. It lacks guidance on expected output, prerequisites, and differentiation from similar tools like agloop_append_log. The description fails to provide a complete picture for proper usage.

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 has three parameters with zero description coverage. The description mentions 'status and/or result log' but does not explain the format, allowed values, or how the result_log parameter behaves (append vs replace). The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but more detail is needed.

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', the resource 'task', and what can be updated: 'status and/or result log'. It also mentions auto-setting timestamps and a restriction 'COORDINATOR ONLY', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like agloop_get_task or agloop_append_log.

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 a clear restriction ('COORDINATOR ONLY'), indicating who can use it. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., agloop_append_log for logs), but the context is adequate.

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