task_checklist_complete

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

Annotations already cover readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true. The description adds the requirement for user confirmation, which is extra behavioral context not captured by annotations. It also implicitly indicates a state change. This adds value beyond the annotations, though it does not detail side effects or reversibility.

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 two concise sentences with no fluff. The main action is front-loaded, and the confirmation requirement is stated succinctly. Every word earns its place.

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 mutation tool with an output schema present, the description is adequate. It covers the action and the confirmation requirement. It could mention prerequisites like the item existing, but that is not critical for basic usage. Given the annotations and schema, the description is fairly complete.

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%, with both id and item_id clearly documented. The description does not add any parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the specific verb 'Отметить' (mark), the resource 'пункт чек-листа' (checklist item), and the outcome 'выполненным' (completed). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like task_checklist_add (which adds items) and task_complete (which completes entire tasks).

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 mentions that user confirmation is required, which gives some context, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. The implication is clear from the resource type, but no explicit routing to alternatives is given.

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