start_task

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility. It reveals the action and the 'sessions_spawn' mechanism but omits return behavior, asynchronicity, side effects, and permissions, leaving an agent to guess operational details.

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 single sentence is concise and front-loaded with the action, but it is under-specified for a tool with 5 parameters including nested objects. Conciseness is achieved at the expense of necessary detail.

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's complexity (5 parameters, nested objects, no output schema, no annotations), a one-sentence description is severely incomplete. Missing return format, parameter semantics, and usage context.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain any of the five parameters (title, prompt, channel, metadata, requesterSession). It fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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?

Description states a specific verb ('Start') and object ('subagent task'), and names the mechanism ('via OpenClaws sessions_spawn'). It does not explicitly name siblings, but the start action is inherently distinct from list_tasks and get_task_status.

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?

O only describes what the tool does; it provides no when-to-use context, prerequisites, or exclusions, and does not contrast with sibling tools like list_tasks or get_task_status.

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