task_create

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description adds value by disclosing that user confirmation is required—a behavioral constraint not present in the annotations. This helps the agent know it must pause for user approval before executing.

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 short sentences with no redundant phrasing. It front-loads the action, then covers mandatory fields and confirmation in a compact, efficient manner.

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 creation tool with a complex nested fields object, the description covers the essential prerequisites and constraints. An output schema exists, so return-value details are not required. It could mention error conditions or permission requirements, but it is sufficiently complete for an agent to call it correctly.

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 provides detailed coverage of the fields object, but the description adds critical semantic meaning: it marks TITLE and RESPONSIBLE_ID as mandatory inside the fields object (not enforced by the schema's required array) and directs the agent to users_search for finding RESPONSIBLE_ID. This goes beyond the schema's documentation.

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?

Description states a clear verb and resource ('Создать задачу' = Create a task) and is distinct from sibling tools like task_update, task_delete, and task_get. It immediately clarifies the action and what is being acted upon.

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 gives practical usage guidance: it lists mandatory fields (TITLE and RESPONSIBLE_ID), points to users_search for finding IDs, and notes that user confirmation is required. While it does not explicitly name alternative tools for other operations, the purpose is unambiguous enough for an agent to select it for creation tasks.

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