Ensure one task for a GitHub issue

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

The description adds useful behavioral details beyond the idempotentHint annotation, notably 'create at most one marked task' and 'not planned for Today unless planToday=true'. It also clarifies the scope of what constitutes an existing task (native or MCP-marked), providing transparency not available from annotations alone.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core action. It consists of two sentences that convey the essential behavior without wasted words, earning a perfect score for conciseness.

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 tool has 5 parameters, no output schema, and no schema descriptions. The description covers the core behavior but omits return value, behavior when multiple tasks already exist, and details for half the parameters. It is adequate but leaves notable gaps for a moderately complex tool.

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 must explain parameters. It explains the 'issue' parameter format (owner/repo#number or URL) and the effect of 'planToday', but leaves 'notes', 'title', and 'projectId' unexplained. Only 2 of 5 parameters are covered, which is insufficient for the low schema coverage.

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 tool's purpose: find an existing task for a GitHub issue and create at most one if missing. The verb 'ensure' plus the specific resource (task for a GitHub issue) makes it distinct from sibling tools like search_tasks or complete_task.

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 usage context is implied rather than explicit: you use this tool when you want to guarantee a task exists for a GitHub issue. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, but the idempotent nature and the 'unless planToday=true' hint suggest typical workflows.

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