reopen_todo

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, so the bar is lower. The description adds context: it clears doneOn to reopen, and explains locator behavior. It does not contradict annotations. However, it could mention that only completed todos are reopened, though that is implied.

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 two sentences: the first clearly states the action and result, the second provides locator guidance. It is concise, front-loaded, and contains no unnecessary words.

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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, with output schema present), the description covers the essential behavior and locator guidance. It could mention what the output contains, but the output schema likely handles that.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by advising to prefer issue/title/owner forms when the raw Huly ToDo ID is unknown, which goes beyond schema structure. This compensates for the high coverage.

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 ('reopen') and the resource ('completed Planner ToDo'), along with the mechanism ('clearing doneOn'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like complete_todo by specifying it acts on completed todos and reverses completion.

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 guidance on locator types ('Human locators search completed ToDos by default; raw todoId locators target that exact ToDo'), which helps in using the tool correctly. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., update_todo) or any prerequisites.

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