create_subtask

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

No annotations are provided, so the description shoulders the transparency burden. It states the basic behavior (create) and return type, but omits details like error states (e.g., missing parent task), side effects, or authentication requirements.

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 three sentences, each serving a clear purpose: introduce the action, define status values, reference sibling tools, and state the return type. No unnecessary words.

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 creation tool with 6 parameters (2 required) and no output schema, the description covers the core behavior, status meanings, related tools, and return format. Missing error handling details but still adequate.

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 schema has 100% parameter descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description reiterates status values (0=todo, etc.) already present in the schema, adding minimal extra value beyond consolidating information.

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 explicitly states 'Create a subtask under an existing Kanboard task,' specifying the resource and action. It contrasts with sibling tools list_subtasks and update_subtask, ensuring clear differentiation.

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 provides guidance on when to use alternatives (list_subtasks, update_subtask), but does not mention prerequisites like the existence of the parent task, which would enhance usability.

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