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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses one behavioral trait ('A closed task is never chased'), but omits critical details like permissions required, whether closing is reversible, or side effects beyond the note. This is minimal coverage for a mutation tool.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by a useful behavioral note. Every sentence earns its place with no unnecessary wording.

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's simplicity (3 parameters, no nested objects) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the basics. However, without annotations, it should provide more behavioral and parameter details to be fully complete for an AI agent.

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 should compensate. It clarifies that status defaults to 'done' and that note is optional, but does not explain the purpose of task_id or what the note represents (e.g., reason for cancellation).

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 'Close' and resource 'task', and clarifies that the default status is 'done'. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like tasks_update, which could also alter task state, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as tasks_update or jobs_complete. The implied usage is clear from 'Close a task', but no conditions or exclusions are provided.

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