uncomplete-tasks

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

The description discloses the core behavior (reopening completed tasks) and complements the annotations by specifying the state transition. It does not mention edge cases like already-uncompleted tasks, but the annotations already signal it is a mutating operation, and the description adds that it is specifically for completed tasks.

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, concise sentence that leads with the verb and states the action, target, and qualifier with no unnecessary words. It is perfectly front-loaded and efficient.

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?

For a simple one-parameter mutation tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential information: action, target, and input type. It does not address edge cases, but given the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, it is sufficiently complete.

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 already documents the single parameter 'ids' with a clear description, and the tool description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema provides. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 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 action ('Uncomplete (reopen)'), the resource (completed tasks), and the input mechanism (by their IDs). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'complete-tasks' by specifying the reverse operation.

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 clearly implies the tool is used when the user wants to reopen one or more completed tasks, providing clear usage context. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is unambiguous and no conflicting tool exists for this action.

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