Create task

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose two useful traits: append-at-bottom ordering and the default lane. It omits what happens with an unknown lane name, what the call returns (the created task?), and any permission or auth requirements for a mutation.

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, zero filler, with the core action and the most surprising behavior (lane default) both front-loaded.

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 six-parameter creation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the one non-obvious behavior (default lane and insertion position). Requirements like project/title are enforced by the schema's required list, so little is missing.

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 coverage is 67% and the description reinforces the lane default, while the placement wording ("bottom") adds ordering semantics the schema does not express. Remaining parameters (title, labels, body) are self-evident or schema-documented, so the baseline applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Add a task") plus the placement rule ("to the bottom of a lane"), which is genuinely distinguishing information. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings like update_task or create_lane, though the name makes the distinction reasonably obvious.

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 only guidance is the lane fallback ("Defaults to the first lane"), which describes default behavior rather than when to choose this tool over update_task or move_task. Usage is implied by the name rather than stated.

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