new task

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, so the mutation profile is covered. The description adds that the action navigates the UI to a 'new task view' via CDP DOM or keyboard shortcut, which is modestly useful context, but it never says whether a task is actually persisted, whether repeated calls create duplicates, or what happens if the view is already open.

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?

Two short sentences with the action stated first and the invocation hint second – well front-loaded and free of padding. The phrasing is terse to the point of being cryptic about what a 'task' is in this product context.

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?

With zero parameters, no output schema, and annotations covering the safety profile, the remaining burden is small. Still, the description leaves unclear what a created task contains, whether it returns an identifier, and how the UI-navigation behavior interacts with other tools in the set.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the baseline of 4 applies. No misleading parameter language is present.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('新建任务' – create a new task), which is unambiguous on its own. It does not distinguish this from siblings such as minimax_open_session, minimax_tasks, or minimax_send_message, so an agent must infer which entry point to use.

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 second sentence ('优先通过 CDP DOM 触发或快捷键切换至新建任务视图') describes how to trigger the action mechanically, not when to choose this tool over alternatives. There is no statement of preconditions, no exclusion, and no named sibling for comparison.

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