create_task

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only states the action 'create' without disclosing side effects, error conditions (e.g., duplicate title), or required permissions. It assumes the agent knows the tool creates a single task with specified fields.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded and concise. However, it is excessively brief, omitting useful details like the existence of optional parameters or behavior. It is minimally viable but not well-structured for agent comprehension.

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 tool's 6 parameters and 25 sibling tools, the description does not provide enough context for an agent to use it effectively. It fails to hint at common use cases (e.g., creating a task with due date, category) or differentiate from batch_create_tasks.

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 83%, so most parameters have descriptions in the schema. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, earning the baseline score of 3.

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 verb 'Create' and the resource 'new task' in Amazing Marvin. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'batch_create_tasks' which creates multiple tasks, and 'create_project' for projects, though it does not explicitly name them.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like batch_create_tasks or create_project. There is no context on prerequisites, such as requiring a project or category to exist before assigning.

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