submit_task

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions file upload constraints (current directory, 100MB limit) but does not state whether the operation is destructive, requires authentication, or what error handling looks like. For a submission tool, this is insufficient.

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 concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the primary purpose. It efficiently communicates file upload constraints without unnecessary words.

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?

Given 6 parameters (2 required), 0% schema coverage, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It only explains input_files constraints and omits behavior, output, and other parameter semantics. The presence of an output schema does not compensate for missing parameter details.

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 0%, so parameters have no descriptions. The description only explains 'input_files' (local file paths, constraints). Other parameters like service_id, task_prompt, output_prompt, session_id, server remain undocumented. Adds value for one parameter but leaves major 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?

The description clearly states 'Submit task to remote agent (support file upload)', which is a specific verb-resource pair. It adds file upload constraints, making the purpose clear. However, it doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'discover' or 'get_task', but the core action is unambiguous.

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. The sibling tools have distinct names (cancel, discover, download), so usage is implied, but the description does not provide context or exclusions.

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