add-tasks

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

Annotations already indicate the tool is mutable and non-destructive. The description adds only that assignment to collaborators is supported, which is also covered in the schema. No additional behavioral context (e.g., side effects, rate limits, required permissions) is provided.

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 a single clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficient, meeting the need 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?

Despite the tool's complexity (12 nested properties, output schema), the description is too brief. It omits guidance on parameter relationships, error conditions, or use cases. The schema provides some context, but the description should offer a higher-level overview.

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 detailed property descriptions. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by noting assignment support, but does not explain how parameters interact (e.g., projectId vs sectionId vs parentId).

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 adds one or more tasks to a project, section, or parent. The verb 'add' is specific, and the resource 'tasks' is explicit. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'add-comments' or 'add-projects' by naming the target type.

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 the tool is for adding tasks, but provides no guidance on when to use it versus alternative tools (e.g., 'update-tasks', 'reschedule-tasks') or when not to use it. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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