create_task_document

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the core action and a parameter hint, omitting details like idempotency, error behavior, permission requirements, or side effects (e.g., whether duplicate attachments are allowed).

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 and front-loaded with the action. However, it is so brief that it sacrifices crucial details. It earns its keep but could be expanded slightly without being verbose.

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?

Despite having an output schema (so return details are covered), the description lacks information on when to use this tool, prerequisites, error handling, or integration with sibling tools. For a tool creating a task document, more context is needed.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning only for 'file_id' (notes it comes from files API), but does not explain 'task_id' or the optional 'name' parameter. The hint is insufficient for a tool with 3 parameters.

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 ('Attach a file to a task') with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'add_file_to_matter' by specifying 'to a task'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'add_files_to_matter_batch'), prerequisites (task must exist), or when not to use it. The single-line description lacks contextual usage advice.

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