clickup_remove_task_from_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does substantial work: it discloses the multi-home-only constraint, the paid-plan prerequisite, and the consequence of using the wrong tool. It stops short of saying whether removal also deletes the task or its comments/attachments, and says nothing about auth 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?

Three short sentences, all load-bearing: scope first, exclusion/alternative second, prerequisite third. No repetition of the tool name or filler.

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 2-parameter mutation with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential constraints an agent needs. It could go slightly further by clarifying that the task itself is not deleted, but nothing critical to correct invocation is missing.

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 100%, with both task_id (internal vs custom ID formats) and list_id documented inline. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a precise verb+resource+scope: removing a task from an ADDITIONAL (multi-homed) list, not its home list. This lets an agent distinguish it from clickup_delete_task and its inverse clickup_add_task_to_list without opening any schema.

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?

Gives an explicit when-not with a named alternative ('Cannot remove a task from its home list (use clickup_delete_task for that)'), plus a prerequisite ('Requires the paid Tasks-in-Multiple-Lists feature'). Nothing about selection is left to inference.

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