Criar task (webhook)

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the tool creates a task via webhook, but does not reveal any side effects, required permissions, rate limits, or what happens after creation. This is insufficient for a mutation operation.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences that convey the core functionality and a key feature. No unnecessary words or repetition. It earns its place.

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, no output schema, no annotations), the description is far from complete. It fails to explain return values, error handling, permission requirements, or how the webhook integration works. A create operation with many parameters demands more context.

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?

Schema description coverage is 67%, which is moderate. The description highlights 'metadata' for custom fields but does not elaborate on other parameters like format or constraints. The schema itself provides basic descriptions for most parameters, but the description adds minimal value beyond that.

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 action ('Cria uma nova task'), resource ('task'), and context ('em um projeto via webhook'). It also mentions a specific feature (custom fields via metadata). The sibling tools (update, move) are distinct, so this tool's 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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings. It does not mention any prerequisites, limitations, or alternative tools. The agent is left to infer solely from the tool's name and purpose.

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