merge_task

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

With no annotations, the description fully covers behavioral traits: it explains that child content is appended to the parent description and children are marked as 'pruned' but recoverable. This provides sufficient transparency for a safe operation.

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, with the main action in the first sentence and supporting details in short, well-structured sentences. No redundant information.

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's simplicity (one parameter, output schema exists), the description provides all necessary context: parameter flexibility, behavioral effect, and the role of the input. It is fully complete for an agent to use correctly.

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 single parameter task_id is thoroughly explained: it accepts multiple reference forms (UUID, sequence shorthand, canonical ref, app URL) and clarifies that it expects a child's ID, adding meaning beyond the input schema's type definition.

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: 'Roll the active children of a task back into the parent.' It uses specific verbs and resources, and distinguishes from siblings like fold_task and split_task through its unique action.

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 gives clear context on how to use the tool ('Pass the id of any child whose parent should receive the merge'), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare to alternative siblings, leaving some guidance implicit.

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