create_task

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that the tool creates a task and returns the created data with an ID, and it provides behavioral notes on parameters (e.g., is_fixed prevents optimizer movement). However, it does not disclose potential side effects, permission requirements, or failure modes, which a fully transparent description might include.

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 well-structured: a one-sentence purpose, a bulleted parameter list, and a returns line. It is appropriately sized for an 8-parameter tool, with every line adding value, though the parameter list is necessarily lengthy.

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 parameters with type/format details, names the required field, and states the return value. Given the presence of an output schema, it does not need to elaborate on return structure. It lacks discussion of edge cases or side effects, but for a create tool with clear parameter docs, it is reasonably complete.

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 description provides detailed semantics for all 8 parameters, including units, formats, examples, and domain meaning (e.g., priority: 'higher = more important'; estimated_duration: 'in hours'). Since the schema provides only types and defaults with 0% coverage, this description fully compensates and exceeds baseline.

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 opens with the specific verb+resource combination 'Create a new task,' which clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like update_task, delete_task, and list_tasks. 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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It relies on the verb 'create' to imply usage, but offers no exclusions or alternative tool references, so guidance is only implicit.

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