create-task

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not say what happens to unspecified optional fields (e.g. the default status), whether a task name must be unique, or whether the categoryUUID must resolve via get-todo-category-list.

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?

It is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler, so nothing is wasted. However, the brevity reflects under-specification for an 8-parameter mutation rather than disciplined conciseness.

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 an eight-parameter creation tool with no output schema, the description omits anything an agent might need: whether the created task is returned, what status defaults to when omitted, and how categoryUUID relates to the sibling get-todo-category-list tool. Only the schema carries that burden.

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% and every one of the 8 parameters is documented inline, including the enum for status and the ISO format for the date fields, so the schema does the work. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, which is the baseline 3 case for high-coverage schemas.

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 states a specific verb and resource ("Creates a new task") and scopes it to the TODO feature, so the agent knows exactly what the tool produces. It does not distinguish itself from siblings like update-task or delete-task beyond the verb, which is the only thing keeping it from a 5.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no reference to alternatives such as update-task or get-tasks-list. The agent must infer from the verb alone that this is only for creating a task that does not yet exist.

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