split_task

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

No annotations are present, so the description must compensate. It mentions that task_id accepts multiple reference forms and that the return includes the updated parent and both new children. However, it does not specify whether the operation is destructive, what permissions are needed, or any side effects beyond preserving the parent.

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 two paragraphs. The first paragraph states the core functionality, and the second adds useful parameter details. No extraneous information is present, though structure could be improved with bullet points.

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 5 required parameters, no parameter descriptions, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. While the existence of an output schema is noted, the description fails to provide sufficient guidance for correct invocation, especially regarding the content of the two child tasks.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should explain parameters, but it only addresses task_id (reference forms). The other four required parameters (first_title, first_description, second_title, second_description) are not described, leaving the agent without guidance on their format or purpose.

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 action: 'Decompose a task into two child tasks while preserving the parent.' This provides a specific verb and resource, and the outcome is well-defined, distinguishing it from siblings like merge_task or delete_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 description offers no guidance on when to use split_task versus alternatives such as fold_task, merge_task, or other task manipulation tools. No context is provided about prerequisites or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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