backlog

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses key side effects: appearance in '+ACTIVE queries' and 'higher urgency score' modification. Explains state change semantics clearly. Lacks only idempotency or error-case details for a perfect 5.

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, each earning its place: core action, side effects, sibling alternatives, constraints. Front-loaded with primary verb, logically sequenced, zero 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?

For a single-parameter state-transition tool with no output schema, description provides excellent domain context (+ACTIVE queries, urgency scoring, lifecycle workflow). Only gap is return value description, but output schema absence means this is not required.

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%, establishing baseline 3. Description does not redundantly explain the 'id' parameter beyond schema's definition, which is appropriate since schema already specifies 'Task ID number (e.g. '1') or UUID. Task must be in pending status.'

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?

Specific verb+resource combo ('Mark a task as actively being worked on') with clear scope (recording start timestamp). Explicitly distinguishes from siblings task_stop and task_done by naming them and defining distinct lifecycle states.

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 alternatives: 'Use task_stop when pausing work, or task_done when finished.' Also clarifies constraint: 'Only one task needs to be active at a time, but multiple active tasks are allowed,' guiding the agent on valid usage patterns.

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