annotate_task

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses key behavioral traits: annotations are appended (not replacing others), automatically timestamped, support dry_run, and require CONTRIBUTOR role. No contradictory information.

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 5 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by behavioral details, usage guidance, and constraints. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

The description covers all essential aspects: purpose, behavior (append, not replace, timestamp), usage guidance (when/not), dry_run, role requirement, and distinction from sibling modify_task. With an output schema present, return values need not be explained.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema: it explains that annotations are appended with automatic timestamps, and mentions dry_run. However, it does not explicitly describe the uuid parameter or the format of the annotation string.

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 'Append a timestamped annotation to a task', specifying the verb (append), resource (task), and the nature (timestamped annotation). It distinguishes from modify_task by noting that annotations are for narrative context, not structured fields.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool (for narrative context, URLs, reference links) and when not to (for structured fields, use modify_task). It also mentions the dry_run option for preview and the CONTRIBUTOR role requirement.

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