weeek_complete_task

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the tool is a WRITE OPERATION that may prompt for confirmation, explains the complete/reopen toggle behavior, and details the optional mr_url functionality. No contradictions.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose and uses clear formatting. It is slightly verbose but every sentence adds value, especially the distinctions and usage hints. Could be streamlined slightly, but overall effective.

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 has 4 parameters (1 required) and no output schema, the description is complete. It explains return value ('Returns the updated task'), prerequisites (task_id from weeek_list_tasks), and behavioral details. No gaps for correct tool selection.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all 4 parameters. The description adds value beyond schema: it clarifies that completed=false reopens, mr_url records a link on the 'МР' field, and field_name is optional with mr_url. This extra context justifies a 4 despite high schema coverage.

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 action: 'Mark a WEEEK task as COMPLETE or REOPEN a completed task.' It specifies the verb (mark) and resource (task), and explicitly distinguishes from siblings like weeek_move_task and weeek_update_task, making the purpose 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 provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use this tool when the user says mark done, complete, finish, close, reopen, or uncomplete.' It clearly differentiates from alternatives, instructs that task_id must come from weeek_list_tasks, and suggests an alternative tool when no completion change is involved.

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