reschedule-tasks

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

Annotations mark destructiveHint=true, and the description elaborates on the destructive nature by specifying that it changes only the date and preserves recurrence patterns. This adds context beyond the annotations without contradiction.

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 (two sentences), front-loads the core purpose, and efficiently uses the comparison with update-tasks to convey both function and usage.

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?

With a single parameter, a complete output schema, and a description that covers purpose and usage context, the tool is fully contextualized. The description provides sufficient information for an agent to select and invoke it 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 input schema has 100% description coverage, including details on date format and time preservation. The description does not add additional parameter semantics, but the baseline of 3 applies since the schema already provides thorough parameter documentation.

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 specifies a verb ('Reschedule') and resource ('tasks'), and explicitly contrasts with update-tasks to distinguish its scope. The phrase 'preserving recurring schedules' adds precision about what the tool does.

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?

Explicitly names update-tasks as the alternative and states when to use this tool: 'Use this when moving recurring tasks to a different date without altering their repeat pattern.' It provides clear usage conditions.

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