claim_next_task

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the internal resolution order and the effect of the dry_run parameter. However, it does not cover error handling or authorization, but the disclosed logic is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 extremely concise with only two sentences. The core action is front-loaded, and every sentence provides necessary information without redundancy.

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?

The tool is complex with 5 parameters and a nested scope object, yet no output schema. The description explains the resolution order and the fresh parameter, but omits details about the return value ('context'), the effect of context_depth, and edge cases like no task available. This leaves the agent with incomplete understanding.

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?

Only 20% of parameters (dry_run) have descriptions in the schema. The description adds meaning for fresh and scope, but does not describe ttl_minutes or context_depth. It partially compensates for the low schema coverage but leaves gaps.

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 clearly states the verb 'Pick', 'claim', and 'return' applied to the resource 'next task'. The resolution order and the fresh parameter add specificity, making the tool's purpose distinct, even though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools.

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 clear guidelines on the resolution order and when to use fresh:true to skip the resume step. It does not explicitly mention when not to use the tool or compare with alternatives like 'release_task', but the context is well-defined.

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