vikunja_tasks

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It omits any mention of side effects (e.g., destructive operations like delete), authentication requirements, or read/write nature. The agent has no insight into tool behavior beyond the subcommand names.

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 short sentence, but it sacrifices necessary information for brevity. It lacks structure (no bullet points, no examples) and fails to earn its place by omitting critical details expected for a complex tool.

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 tool's complexity (30 parameters, 20 subcommands, many sibling tools) and absence of output schema or rich annotations, the description is wholly inadequate. It provides no usage context, no subcommand-specific guidance, and no behavioral details, making it nearly useless for correct 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, meaning no parameter descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds no explanation for any of the 30 parameters, leaving the agent clueless about parameter meaning, default values, or which parameters apply to which subcommands.

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?

Description states 'Manage tasks with comprehensive operations' and lists examples, which gives a general sense. However, it doesn't distinguish this from specialized sibling tools like vikunja_task_crud or vikunja_task_assignees, making it unclear when to use this over those.

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 on when to use this tool versus specialized siblings. The description does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or alternatives, leaving the agent to infer usage from context.

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