task_create

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions the return format (e.g., DIVE-N) but omits details like side effects, idempotency, authentication requirements, or error handling. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 concise sentences that front-load the primary action and return value, with no redundant information. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 creation tool with 6 optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the return value but lacks information on error scenarios, rate limits, or behavioral nuances. It is minimally adequate but incomplete.

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 schema covers all parameters (100% coverage), so the description doesn't need to add much. It does add the return id format, which is helpful. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already documents parameter meanings.

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 action ('Create a task'), specifies the resource ('shared 5dive task queue'), and indicates the return value (id). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by being the only creation tool among them.

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 advises 'Use for filing work for an agent or human on the fleet,' providing a clear use case. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives, missing an opportunity for fuller guidance.

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