create_agenda

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It discloses the return format (a dict with status and agenda_id) and the required task structure. However, it does not elaborate on side effects, error behavior, or permissions, leaving some uncertainty for a write operation.

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 structured with clear 'Args' and 'Returns' sections, front-loading the purpose. It is concise and free of filler, though some repetition occurs with 'Optional'.

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 low complexity and presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the parameters and return value. It explains the task structure but lacks details on validation or status codes, which is a minor gap. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke the 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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, but the description compensates by explaining each parameter. It specifies tasks as a list of dicts with required 'details' and optional 'is_optional' and 'acceptance_guard'. It also clarifies title and description are optional, adding meaning beyond the bare schema.

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's purpose: 'Create a new agenda (plan/todo list).' The verb 'Create' and the resource 'agenda' are explicit, distinguishing it from sibling update/delete tools. The parenthetical clarifies what an agenda is.

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 through the verb 'Create' but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. It provides no exclusions or reference to other tools like update_agenda. The context is clear enough for a create operation, but lacks explicit guidance.

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