Mark task ready for review

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

There are no annotations, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the status change and provides no information about prerequisites, permissions, reversibility, side effects, or return value. This is a minimal behavioral disclosure.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant information. Every word adds value, especially the distinction from full resolution submission.

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 simple single-parameter tool, the description covers the core action and provides some workflow context. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it lacks detail on preconditions and what the caller should expect after 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?

The schema provides only a parameter name and type with no description, and the description does not mention taskId at all. The parameter is inferable from its name, but the schema marks it as not required (0 required parameters), which is ambiguous and unaddressed.

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 uses a specific verb ('Move') and resource ('task') and clearly states the action: changing task status to 'review'. It also differentiates itself from the sibling tool 'submit_task_resolution' by explicitly saying 'without submitting a full resolution'.

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 phrase 'without submitting a full resolution' gives useful context for when this tool is appropriate versus a full resolution submission. However, it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools or state conditions for when not to use it.

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