snooze_task

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

No annotations are provided. The description states it snoozes a task but fails to disclose what that means concretely—whether it changes the due date, status, or creates a reminder. The agent lacks awareness of side effects, permissions needs, or behavioral impacts beyond the minimal action.

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 a single sentence, very concise with no wasted words. However, it could benefit from slightly more structure, such as separating the action from the parameter requirement. Still, efficient for its length.

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 simplicity (2 params, no complex nesting) and presence of an output schema, the description still leaves ambiguity about what snoozing entails (e.g., does it override the existing due date? Is it a reminder?). It lacks completeness in explaining the behavior and outcome, making it insufficient for an agent to fully trust the tool's effect.

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 0%. The description only hints at the due_date parameter being in ISO 8601 format, but does not clarify the task_id (e.g., format or source) nor explain the semantics of the parameters fully. The addition of date format is marginally helpful but insufficient given the lack of other param details.

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 (snooze), the resource (task), and the key requirement (future date in ISO 8601 format). It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like update_task, complete_task, etc., by using the specific verb 'snooze', which is unique among the listed siblings.

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 snooze_task versus alternatives like update_task or reschedule. It does not mention contexts, prerequisites, or when not to use, leaving the agent with insufficient decision-making information.

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