Start one task

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

Annotations already declare it is mutating, non-destructive, and idempotent. The description adds that it sets the current task to exactly the supplied ID, implying replacement of any existing current task, which is useful context beyond annotations. However, it doesn't discuss error cases or effects on timer state.

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?

Single sentence, directly to the point, with no filler. Front-loaded with the action verb 'Start tracking.'

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently explains the basic functionality. It could mention what happens to the previously tracked task or existing timer, but the word 'exactly' implies a clean replacement. Overall, adequate for the tool's simplicity.

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 has no descriptions (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. It mentions 'supplied task ID,' which confirms the parameter's role, but doesn't elaborate on format or constraints beyond the schema. Given only one parameter named taskId, the description provides minimal added meaning.

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 uses a specific verb 'Start tracking' and clearly indicates the resource: 'exactly the supplied task ID as the current task.' This distinguishes it from siblings like get_current_task (reads) and stop_timer (stops).

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 implies this tool is used when you want to set a specific task as current, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like plan_task_today or list_today. No exclusions or alternative references are provided.

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