Toggle Task Status

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

The description discloses key behaviors: date stamping on done, failure on non-task lines, vault path precedence, and session-active vault dependency. Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) are consistent with the mutation described.

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 concise with two focused paragraphs. The first explains core functionality and failure case; the second clarifies vault behavior. Every sentence is informative and 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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, inputs, behavior, prerequisites, vault scoping, and external dependency on tasks.search. Even with output schema present, the description provides sufficient context for effective use.

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 adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining the roles of sourceFile, lineNumber, doneDate, and vaultPath. Schema already provides good descriptions for three parameters, and the description covers vaultPath which lacks schema description.

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 explicitly states the tool flips a task checkbox between `[ ]` and `[x]`, identifies the task by sourceFile and lineNumber, and stamps a date when marking done. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like tasks.search by recommending its use for finding the correct pair.

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 advises using tasks.search to find the correct sourceFile/lineNumber pair, provides context about vault scoping, and implies when to use (toggling) vs. when not (non-task lines). However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives like tasks.create or tasks.updateMetadata for different operations.

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