next_task

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose behavior when no next task exists, how the sequence is determined, or whether the operation is read-only. For a tool with no annotations, more detail is needed.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and includes a concrete example. Every sentence adds value with no wasted words.

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?

For a single-parameter retrieval tool without an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It explains the purpose and usage example, but could mention the expected return format or edge cases like a missing next task.

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 parameter 'number' has a regex pattern in the schema, and the description adds meaning by explaining its format (e.g., CDB-23) and how it is used to find the next task. However, it does not specify what happens on invalid input or describe the return value.

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 retrieves the next task in sequence based on a current task number (e.g., CDB-23 → CDB-24), and explains its utility in project workflows. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_task and list_tasks.

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 context that it is useful for finding the next task to be done, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare it to alternative tools like get_task or list_tasks.

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