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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so mutation is expected. The phrase 'hide or reveal' adds the useful nuance that the operation is reversible, which goes beyond annotations. However, it does not disclose side effects, permission requirements, or what 'destructive' means in this context.

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 single sentence 'Admin: hide or reveal a task.' is maximally concise and entirely front-loaded with the action. There is no redundant information, and the structure is efficient for the minimal content provided.

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 destructive admin operation with five parameters and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It leaves the meaning of request_id, the effect of hidden=true/false, and the role of admin_token unexplained, requiring too much inference for correct invocation.

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 only 20% (only agent_key has a description), yet the tool description mentions no parameters. It does not explain hidden, task_id, request_id, or admin_token, failing to compensate for the low schema coverage. Agents are left to infer meaning from the pattern and title alone.

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 a specific verb ('hide or reveal') and resource ('task') with an admin scope, making the tool's purpose clear. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling admin tools such as pause, approve, or kill_switch, so it lacks explicit differentiation.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no conditions for hiding or revealing a task. It is a bare command without any usage context.

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