start_task

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true directly contradicts the description's 'Start a task' which implies a state-changing operation (creating a job). The description does not clarify this mismatch or disclose any other behavioral traits such as asynchronous execution, side effects, or permissions beyond the immediate-return note.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the core purpose and immediate behavior. It is concise, free of fluff, and structured to be easily parsed by an agent.

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 tool with three parameters and no output schema, the description omits critical details about parameter semantics and the nature of the task. It does mention the immediate return with a job ID, but the lack of parameter explanations and the annotation contradiction make the description incomplete for reliable invocation.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description should explain the parameters (profile, task, max_output_tokens) but does not. It adds no meaning about what each parameter represents or how they relate to the task execution, leaving the agent without sufficient information to populate them correctly.

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 action (start), the resource (bounded external-model task), and the immediate outcome (return with a job ID). It is specific and not tautological, giving an agent a precise understanding of what the tool accomplishes.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings (e.g., delegate_task, get_task_result). There are no conditions, exclusions, or alternative routing hints, leaving the agent to guess the appropriate selection context.

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