Task Undo Tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It clearly states the state change (completed → not completed), which is the key behavioral trait. However, it doesn't disclose whether the operation is reversible, whether it affects dependent data, or what the response contains. With no annotations, a 3 is appropriate – it covers the core behavior but not edge cases.

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?

A single sentence with zero waste. The action is stated directly and the description is appropriately sized for a simple one-parameter tool.

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 simple state-reversal tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is mostly complete. However, it doesn't clarify what happens if the task is already not completed (idempotency), or whether there are any prerequisites. The output schema exists, so return values are covered, but the edge-case behavior is undocumented.

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 100% – the single parameter task_id is fully described in the schema as 'The task ID to undo.' The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 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?

The description 'Mark a task as not completed' clearly states the verb (mark) and resource (task) with a specific state change. It distinguishes itself from task_complete_tool and task_delete_tool among siblings, though it doesn't explicitly name them.

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 implies usage: use this when a task was completed and needs to be reverted. It doesn't explicitly state when to use it vs task_complete_tool or task_delete_tool, but the semantics are clear enough that an agent can infer the appropriate context.

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