create_crm_task

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It only states that the tool creates a task, implying a write operation, but provides no details on side effects (e.g., notifications, auto-assignment), authentication needs, or rate limits. The behavioral transparency is 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 concise: one sentence plus a list of example fields. It is front-loaded with the purpose. While more detail could be added, the brevity is appropriate for a simple create operation.

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 complexity (2 parameters, output schema exists), the description lacks completeness. It omits prerequisites, error handling, behavior on missing fields, and when to choose this tool over siblings. The output schema is not detailed but that is acceptable.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for parameters. The description adds meaning for the 'body' parameter by specifying it should be JSON with fields like title, status, assigneeId, etc. However, it does not explain the 'tenant_id' parameter or its optionality (though the schema shows a default). This partial compensation yields a score of 3.

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 CRM task' with a verb and resource. It lists example fields (title, status, assigneeId, etc.) which clarifies what the task body contains. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling task creation tools (e.g., clio_create_task, smokeball_create_task), though the CRM prefix in the name helps.

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 alternatives like update_crm_task, get_crm_task, or list_crm_tasks. No prerequisites, context, or exclusion criteria are mentioned.

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