create_procedure_task

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says 'Create a new Procedure Task.' It does not mention any requirements, side effects, permissions, or the need for an existing procedure. For a mutation operation with 8 parameters, this lack of context is a serious gap.

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 a single short sentence, which is undeniably concise and front-loaded. However, it is under-specified for an 8-parameter tool, and the sentence merely restates the tool name without adding substantive content. It is not verbose, but it fails to provide necessary structure or explanation.

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?

The description is far too brief for a tool with 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. It provides no context about what a Procedure Task is, how it relates to procedures, what fields are required, or how to handle the parameters. The statement may help with tool selection but is inadequate for ensuring 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?

The schema description coverage is only 13% (just the due_date field has a description), yet the tool description adds absolutely no parameter information. It does not define name, procedure_id, assigned_users, priority, or any other parameter, so the agent receives zero value beyond the raw schema names, making correct invocation very difficult.

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 'Create a new Procedure Task.' is essentially a direct restatement of the tool name 'create_procedure_task' with almost no added information. It states the action and resource but does not add any distinguishing detail or nuance beyond the name itself, making it a tautology rather than a truly clarifying description.

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 guidance about when to use this tool vs. alternatives such as update_procedure_task or create_procedure. No prerequisites, exclusions, or contextual hints are provided, leaving the agent without any help in deciding if this is the correct tool for the scenario.

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