task_complete

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the mutating nature is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by requiring user confirmation, but it does not describe side effects, reversibility, or any consequences beyond completing the task.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences. The primary action is front-loaded, and the confirmation requirement is stated immediately after. 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 single-parameter tool with an output schema and annotations covering destructiveness and read-only status, the description is nearly complete. It adds the important user-confirmation requirement but omits any context about when completing a task is appropriate or what happens after completion.

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% for the only parameter, 'id' (task ID). The description does not add meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline for high coverage without enriching parameter understanding.

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: 'Завершить задачу' (complete the task). It is clear enough to distinguish from siblings like task_delete or task_update, though it does not explicitly name the alternative it is not.

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 states a prerequisite, 'Требует подтверждения пользователя' (requires user confirmation), but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as task_move_stage or task_update. No exclusions or alternative conditions are provided.

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