boardagent_create_task

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full burden and does disclose two non-obvious traits: the forced initial status ('always created as todo') and the authorization requirement ('Requires write role'). It still omits return behavior, error/duplicate handling, and whether the new task id is returned.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and free of filler. The enumerated color list partially duplicates the schema enum, which is the only mild redundancy.

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 14-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers auth and initial state but says nothing about the returned value, defaults beyond priority, or what most parameters do. Adequate but with visible gaps for a tool of this complexity.

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 71% across 14 parameters, so the schema documents most fields itself. The description clarifies that priority is expressed as a color, but that largely restates the enum already present in the schema and adds no meaning for due, estimate, dependencies, custom_fields, or metadata.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource ('Create a new task'), which cleanly separates it from the list/get/update/delete/claim/complete siblings without needing to name them. It never explicitly contrasts against those siblings, so it stops 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?

The clause 'Tasks are always created as todo (claim to start work)' implies a create-then-claim workflow, which is useful routing guidance. However, no alternative tool is named and there is no explicit when/when-not condition, so the guidance is only implied.

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