agent_plan_task

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

No annotations are provided, but the description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the core function, such as side effects, required permissions, or output delivery. It only states the action without context on what happens.

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 with no wasted words, front-loading the key function.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, yet the description does not explain the return format, whether the plan is stored, or any side effects. For a complex planning tool, this is insufficient context.

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 descriptions for both 'task' and 'context' are clear and cover 100% of parameters, so the description adds no additional information. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool decomposes complex software engineering requests into structured implementation phases using PlannerAgent, which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like agent_execute_step and agent_review_code by focusing on planning.

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 implies usage for planning but does not explicitly mention when to use it or alternatives. There is no guidance on when not to use it or prerequisites.

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