create_task

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

Annotations already indicate non-read, non-destructive write (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false). The description adds that the tool 'Supports recurrence and reminder,' but does not elaborate on behavioral traits like whether recurrence creates instances, or if reminder sets an alert. This is acceptable but minimal.

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, concise sentence that delivers the core purpose and two notable features. It is front-loaded with the primary action. However, it lacks any structural elements (e.g., bullet points) that could improve scannability for an agent.

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 tool's complexity (12 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values (except via verbose parameter), error scenarios, or prerequisites like existing list. The openWorldHint suggests unknown side effects, but the description adds no clarity.

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?

With only 33% schema description coverage, the description should compensate. It mentions recurrence and reminder, but fails to explain key parameters like list_id, title, importance, categories, or time_zone. The schema already describes recurrence in detail, but the overall parameter context is insufficient for effective invocation.

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 'Create a new task in a To Do list,' providing a specific verb and resource. It also mentions support for recurrence and reminder, which hints at additional capabilities. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'batch_create_tasks' or 'update_task', which could help the agent choose the right tool.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., batch_create_tasks for multiple tasks, update_task for modifications). The description implies use for single task creation, but fails to provide context on when not to use it or mention prerequisites like an existing list.

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