mark_task_done

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as idempotency, side effects, or what happens if the task is already completed. The output schema exists but is not described, leaving agents uninformed about the return value.

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, efficient sentence that conveys the core action without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and to the point, earning full marks for conciseness.

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?

Despite the tool's simplicity, key details are missing: no error handling, success/failure behavior, or impact on task state. The output schema exists but is not referenced, leaving the agent without a complete picture 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?

With 67% schema coverage, the description does not add meaning beyond what the schema provides. The schema describes 'item_id' and 'timezone_offset' adequately, and the description does not elaborate on any parameters. The undocumented 'debug' parameter is not explained.

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 'mark' and resource 'task' with action 'completed', making the tool's purpose unambiguous. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling 'batch_mark_done', which could lead to confusion in batch versus single task scenarios.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'batch_mark_done' or prerequisites. The tool lacks any contextual hints about appropriate usage, leaving the agent to infer from the name alone.

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