vikunja_task_crud

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'manage', but does not mention required authentication, destructive nature of delete, or that specific operations need particular parameters (e.g., id for update/delete). The description lacks critical safety info.

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 sentence, which is concise but at the expense of essential details. It effectively restates the tool's name and enumerates operations, but contains no proactive guidance. It is minimally adequate but not optimally structured.

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 20 parameters and no annotations or output schema, this description is severely incomplete. The agent cannot correctly invoke the tool without additional documentation. Context like parameter usage per operation, pagination for list, or error handling is entirely 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 0%, and the description adds no explanation of the 20 parameters. It merely lists operations without linking them to required parameters (e.g., create requires title, delete requires id). The agent cannot understand which parameters to use for each operation.

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 states 'Manage individual tasks: create, get, update, delete, list', clearly specifying the resource ('individual tasks') and the actions. It distinguishes from sibling tools like vikunja_tasks (which may handle bulk operations) by emphasizing 'individual'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools (e.g., vikunja_task_assignees, vikunja_task_labels). The agent must infer from the tool name alone, which is insufficient for correct selection.

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