controller_create_task

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It only notes that state is set to 'PLANNING', but omits important details such as side effects, required permissions, whether the task_id parameter can override existing IDs, or what happens if goal is empty. This is insufficient for safe usage.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately short for a simple creation tool, though it could benefit from a brief note about the task_id parameter's purpose.

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 the lack of output schema and the tool's role in task lifecycle management, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what constitutes a 'task', how state transitions work, or what the response looks like. Sibling tools like controller_get_state hint at a broader context that is not addressed.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already describes the two parameters ('goal' and 'optional task_id'). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, maintaining the baseline score. However, it does not clarify the relationship between parameters or any constraints.

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 ('Create a new task') and a specific detail ('set state to PLANNING'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like controller_get_state or controller_record_step_failure, but could explicitly mention that this tool is for initiating tasks rather than modifying existing ones.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., controller_transition or resume_task), nor does it specify prerequisites or conditions for safe invocation.

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