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

Annotations only indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context by stating 'starts unassigned and uncompleted' and 'only title is required', which are not evident from annotations. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, no redundant information. Every clause contributes meaning: the action, the minimal requirement, the default state, and the follow-up tools.

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?

For a simple create tool with 5 parameters (1 required) and an output schema, the description covers the essential usage and default behavior. No return value explanation is needed due to the output schema, and the follow-up tool references handle the task lifecycle adequately.

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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are fully documented. The description adds semantic meaning by explaining the default assignment/completion state, which clarifies how omitting optional parameters behaves. This goes beyond the schema's field descriptions.

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 'Creates a new household task' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like update_task and create_recurring_task by emphasizing the default state and subsequent modification tools. The intent is unambiguous.

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 explicitly names assign_task, update_task, and complete_task as follow-up tools, implying create_task is for new tasks only. It lacks an explicit exclusion of recurring tasks, which is a minor gap given create_recurring_task is a sibling, but the direction is clear.

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