complete_catalog_task

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

The description adds the prerequisite 'Requires WRITE_ENABLED=true', which is beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false already indicates a write). It does not describe side effects or reversibility, but the annotations already signal it is not destructive. It provides some value but remains minimal.

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, front-loaded sentence that captures the core action and a critical prerequisite. There is no filler, and it is easy to parse quickly.

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 close-operation tool, the description covers the essential purpose and a key requirement. It does not explain return values, but no output schema exists, and the agent can infer success from typical tool behavior. It is sufficiently complete for a straightforward mutation.

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 input schema covers all parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the description adds no extra parameter context. It does not explain the default state value or the purpose of close_notes beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline 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 action ('Close'), the specific resource ('catalog fulfillment task (sc_task)'), and the resulting state ('as complete'). It differentiates from generic tools like complete_task by explicitly naming sc_task, so an agent can distinguish it.

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 implies usage for catalog fulfillment tasks by naming the table (sc_task), which distinguishes it from generic task completion. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions (e.g., 'use complete_task for non-catalog tasks'), leaving some inference to the agent.

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