toggle_task_status_tool

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses the toggle behavior, optional done date, and return values. However, it does not mention side effects like file modification, permissions needed, or error cases when the line is not a 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?

Highly concise and well-structured: a brief purpose, detailed explanation, 'When to use' list, and return values. Every sentence adds value, and the main verb is front-loaded.

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?

Covers main behavior, use cases, parameters, and return values. No output schema, but includes return details. Missing explanation of error handling and the ctx parameter, but overall sufficient for a toggle tool.

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 80%, baseline 3. Description adds meaning by explaining the checkbox format and the role of add_done_date. It contextually describes file_path and vault_path beyond schema, but does not explain the ctx parameter.

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 tool toggles task completion status between incomplete and completed, specifying the checkbox format and optional done date. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_task_tool and update_task_metadata_tool by focusing on toggling state.

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?

Includes a 'When to use' section listing explicit use cases (marking tasks complete, unchecking accidentally completed tasks, batch updates). Does not explicitly mention 'when not to use' or name alternatives, but the described use cases are clear.

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