backlog

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It successfully explains key behavioral traits: the copy receives new UUID/ID values, and start/end timestamps/status are reset. It implies a write operation ('Create'). Minor gap: does not mention error behavior or return value structure.

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 efficient sentences with zero waste. Front-loads the core action, follows with behavioral details, and ends with usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy.

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 8 parameters with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context for tool selection and invocation. It explains the duplication mechanics and reset behavior adequately. Minor gap: could clarify what constitutes a valid 'id' format or error conditions.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description frames optional parameters as 'overriding specific fields' which aligns with the schema, but does not add significant semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides for each of the 8 parameters.

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 specific action ('Create a new pending task by copying an existing one') with the resource (task) and mechanism (copying + optional field overrides). It effectively distinguishes from task_add by positioning this as a copy operation versus creation from scratch.

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 states when to use ('when you need a similar task with small variations') and names the specific alternative ('For creating from scratch, use task_add instead'), providing clear guidance for selecting between sibling tools.

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