reschedule-tasks

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true, and the description adds valuable context: it changes only the date, preserves recurrence patterns, and does not wipe recurrence. This goes beyond annotations by explaining the specific behavioral trait of recurrence preservation.

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?

Three sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: stating the action, distinguishing from sibling, and providing usage context. No wasted words, front-loaded with core 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?

The description covers the main use case for recurring tasks and contrasts with the sibling tool. However, it does not explicitly state whether the tool can also be used for non-recurring tasks, leaving a minor ambiguity. Overall, it is fairly complete given the tool's simplicity and the presence of output schema.

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 parameter descriptions already explaining id and date. The tool description does not add new parameter-specific details but provides context on how parameters affect recurrence, which is useful but not essential. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'reschedule' and resource 'tasks', and explicitly distinguishes from sibling 'update-tasks' by highlighting preservation of recurring schedules. This provides a specific, actionable purpose.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool ('when moving recurring tasks to a different date without altering their repeat pattern') and contrasts with 'update-tasks' by explaining the difference in behavior. This gives clear guidance on tool selection.

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