backlog

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Excellently discloses: status change mechanics, end timestamp recording, persistence behavior ('remains in the database'), query visibility, and side effects for recurring instances.

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?

Four sentences with zero waste. Front-loaded with core action, followed by persistence clarification, side-effect warning, and alternative tool reference. Every sentence earns its place.

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 single-parameter mutation with no output schema, description comprehensively covers state changes, side effects, and alternatives. Minor gap: does not describe return value or error cases for already-completed tasks, though agent can infer success/failure.

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% with detailed parameter descriptions (including status constraints). Tool description implies operating on a task but does not add syntax or format details beyond the schema, warranting the baseline score for high-coverage schemas.

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 uses specific verbs ('Mark a task as completed', 'setting its status') and identifies the resource clearly. The mention of 'task_log' for alternative workflows distinguishes this from siblings.

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?

Explicitly directs users to 'task_log' instead when recording work that bypassed pending task creation. Clear when/when-not guidance that helps select between sibling tools.

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