weeek_complete_task

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It accurately conveys the core behavior (completing or reopening) and adds the nuance that setting completed to false reopens the task. However, it does not disclose any potential side effects, permissions, or error handling, which leaves some ambiguity for a mutation tool.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and key parameter usage. No redundant words or unnecessary details.

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 simple toggle tool, the description covers the essential behavior. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it does not mention what the tool returns (if anything) or any prerequisite conditions, which could leave the agent unaware of expected responses or failure modes.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains the completed parameter's meaning via 'completed:false', but it does not explicitly clarify that 'id' refers to the task ID or that completed maps directly to the boolean field. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema's property names.

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 the tool's function with a specific verb ('Mark') and resource ('WEEEK task complete'), and also mentions the ability to reopen (completed:false). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_task, which would be for changing other task 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 provides clear context: use this tool to set a task's completion status. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention update_task, but the specificity of 'complete or reopen' makes the intended usage obvious.

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