add_subtask

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

Annotations indicate the tool is not read-only, destructive, or idempotent. The description adds value by detailing the return (created Subtask) and a common validation error, providing context beyond the annotation hints.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by parameter and error details. No redundant or extraneous content.

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 two-parameter tool with output schema and annotations, the description adequately covers purpose, key parameter semantics, and an error scenario. It lacks sibling differentiation but is largely sufficient for correct usage.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explains that name is the human-readable label, mirrors update_subtask, and notes the 422 error for empty name. This adds meaning, though task_id is not elaborated.

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 starts with 'Add a subtask to a task. Returns the created ``Subtask``.' This clearly specifies the action (add), the resource (subtask), and the output (created Subtask). It distinguishes from siblings like create_task and update_subtask.

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 a helpful error-handling tip for the name parameter but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., update_subtask, reorder_subtasks). There is no guidance on prerequisites or contexts.

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