task_move

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It indicates the behavioral effect (task changes project) but omits side effects like whether subtasks or permissions are preserved, or if moving to global tasks removes project association.

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?

One short, efficient sentence with no redundant words. Front-loaded and earns its place.

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?

Description is brief for a move operation. With no output schema and no annotations, it lacks details on return values, success indicators, or constraints (e.g., required permissions, irreversible actions). Sibling tools like task_update have similar brevity, but more context would improve completeness.

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?

Input schema has 100% parameter coverage with clear descriptions. Description adds no extra parameter info but contextualizes the project_id as 'global tasks'. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description states the verb 'move' and the resource 'task', specifying destination as 'different project or global tasks'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like task_create, task_update, task_delete, but could be more detailed.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., task_update for other changes). The description implies usage when changing a task's project, but does not mention when not to use it or provide comparisons to siblings.

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