create_task

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

Annotations already indicate this is a mutating, non-idempotent operation, and the description does not contradict that. It adds useful output context (the created task's uid and summary) and default behavior, but it does not disclose permissions, duplicate-creation consequences, or failure modes.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, then uses a clean Args/Returns structure with one line per parameter. It contains no filler or redundant prose, and its length is appropriate for nine parameters.

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 having nine parameters and no schema-level descriptions, the description tells the agent exactly what to provide, what each value means, and what the response will contain. Minor omissions like authentication or error handling do not prevent correct invocation for a straightforward create operation.

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 0%, and the description fully compensates by documenting every parameter with meaning, examples, ISO 8601 formats, allowed status values, priority scale, and defaults. This is exactly the level of detail an agent needs to construct valid arguments.

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 opening sentence names a specific verb and resource ('Create a new task in a task list') and the qualifier 'new task' clearly separates it from sibling tools like update_task, complete_task, and delete_task. There is no ambiguity about what this tool does.

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 clearly frames this as the creation path for tasks, which gives an agent enough context to choose it over task-mutating or task-removing siblings. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios, but the intended use is unmistakable.

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