hearthsmith_tasks_snooze

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only says 'snooze nagging.' It does not disclose that the task remains open, that the snooze is temporary, that minutes controls the delay, or what effects this has relative to done and block. These are important behavioral traits for a mutation-like task action.

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 one short sentence with no filler and leads with the action. It is concise and readable, though the brevity comes at the cost of missing useful guidance.

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?

Despite low complexity and the presence of an output schema, the description omits the key distinction from sibling tools (done/block) and the role of the minutes parameter, which an agent needs to choose and invoke the tool correctly. It is minimally understandable but incomplete for confident use in a task-management family.

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%, so the description must compensate for the input schema. It only hints at task_id via 'for a task' and minutes via the verb 'snooze'; it never mentions the default duration, units, or which parameter is required, leaving the schema to do all the work.

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?

"Snooze nagging for a task" states a specific verb (snooze) and resource (nagging/reminders for a task), which distinguishes it from sibling actions like done, list, and add. It is weaker than a 5 because it never explicitly says the reminders are temporarily postponed, leaving some ambiguity with block.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use snooze versus finishing (done), blocking (block), or reviewing nags (nags_recent). An agent must infer the selection criteria from the tool name and sibling list, so the description fails to provide context for choosing this tool.

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