完了タスクの一括非表示

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

The description adds value beyond the destructiveHint annotation by clarifying that tasks are hidden, not deleted, and can be retrieved with showHidden: true. This nuance helps the agent understand the permanence and reversibility of the action. It does not contradict the annotation; rather, it provides helpful detail about the state change.

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 two concise sentences: the first states the core action, the second explains the side effect and recovery method. Every word earns its place, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 simple operation and the presence of a destructiveHint annotation, the description covers the essential behavior: tasks disappear from the list but remain retrievable via showHidden. There is no output schema, but the description sufficiently explains the outcome for an agent to understand the tool's effect. Minor additional detail about the return value would be nice, but it's not critical.

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 input schema already fully documents the tasklist parameter, including its default value and how to obtain the ID from list-tasklists. The description adds no additional semantics for the parameter; it only references the task list indirectly. With 100% schema coverage, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 hides completed tasks in a task list, using a specific verb (非表示) and a specific resource (タスクリスト). It distinguishes itself from siblings by explaining that hidden tasks can still be retrieved with showHidden: true, a behavior not mentioned in other tools. This makes the purpose unambiguous and differentiates it from list-tasks or complete-task.

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 for use: it hides completed tasks from the list and describes the retrieval mechanism. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions, but the operation is unique among siblings, so no exclusions are needed. The context is clear enough for an agent to decide when to invoke it.

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