upservice_create_task

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, etc. Description adds that the tool returns JSON with ID, but does not disclose side effects, idempotency, or failure behavior. Acceptable but not rich.

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?

Concise: one-line summary, parameter list, return type, and two examples. No redundant sentences. Information 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 key parameters and usage via examples. No output schema, but return type is stated. Lacks error conditions or required permissions, but overall sufficient for the tool's complexity.

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 description lists all parameters and provides concrete examples, including mention syntax. Schema already has descriptions, but the examples add practical meaning. Coverage signal is 0% but schema actually has descriptions; still, the description adds value.

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 clearly states 'Create a new task (or meeting/agreement/ticket, depending on `kind`)' with a specific verb and resource. Examples further clarify usage. Distinct from sibling tools like upservice_update_task or upservice_delete_task.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Siblings include other creation tools (upservice_create_project, upservice_create_sprint), but the description does not differentiate contexts. Usage is implied by the examples.

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