Create Goal

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

The description discloses an important behavioral trait: time_period is required by the API even though the schema only lists name as required. It also explains the status limitation and states the return value. These details go beyond what the annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint) provide, making the tool's behavior more predictable.

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 concise at just three sentences. It front-loads the core purpose, then delivers critical caveats (time_period requirement, status limitation) without any fluff. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Given the tool has 11 parameters and no output schema, the description covers essential non-obvious details: the API-required time_period, the status restriction, and the return value. It could mention potential error scenarios or prerequisites for workspace, but the schema covers the workspace parameter. Overall, it is quite complete for a create operation.

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 coverage is 100%, with every parameter having a description. The description adds emphasis on time_period and status, but these details are already present in the schema. The cross-reference to asana_get_time_periods is helpful but also redundant, so the description provides marginal additional value beyond the schema.

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 'Create a new goal in a workspace' with a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like asana_create_task and asana_create_project, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

It provides explicit usage guidance by highlighting that time_period is required and directing the agent to asana_get_time_periods for valid GIDs. It also notes the status constraint, which helps the agent decide when a goal can be created vs. updated. It does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool, but the context is clear.

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