complete_task

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

With no annotations, the description provides key behavioral details: uses Date.now() for completion, sets completed_at to '0' for uncompletion. This goes beyond the schema. However, it omits potential side effects (e.g., notifications) or error conditions, but for a simple wrapper it's adequate.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with API context, no redundancy. Every sentence serves a purpose: identifying the tool and clarifying the boolean parameter behavior.

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 simplicity of the tool (no output schema, two simple params, no annotations), the description is complete. It covers the essential behavior, default, and relationship to update_task. No significant gaps remain.

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 descriptions already cover parameters, but the description adds value by explaining the behavior of true ('uses Date.now()') and false ('sets completed_at to "0"'), and defaults. This enhances understanding beyond the schema's basic 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?

Clearly states the verb ('mark a task complete or uncomplete') and resource ('task'), and distinguishes itself as a convenience wrapper around update_task. The purpose is unambiguous.

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 implies usage for toggling completion status but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives like update_task. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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