complete_task

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action but does not reveal side effects, irreversibility, permission needs, or behavior for already-completed tasks. The mutation is implied but not contextualized.

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 a single concise sentence with no unnecessary words and the action is front-loaded. While appropriately structured, it is too sparse to fully inform the agent, so it does not earn a top score.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and two undocumented required parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not clarify how listId and taskId are used or what happens after completion, leaving an agent without essential operational context.

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 33%, with only the provider parameter described. The description 'Mark a task completed' adds no meaning for the required listId and taskId parameters, failing to explain their roles or relationship, and thus does not compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 completed' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the operation changes a task's status to completed. It is distinguishable from sibling tools like create_task, update_task, and delete_task by its unique completion outcome, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus update_task or move_task_between_lists, and it mentions no prerequisites or exclusions. The intended use case is only implied by the tool name and terse description.

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