toggle_task_done

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without explaining side effects, permissions, reversibility, or behavior on nonexistent tasks. For a mutation tool, this is a notable gap.

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, concise sentence that directly states the action. There is zero wasted wording and it is appropriately sized for the simplicity of the operation.

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 is simple with one well-documented parameter, but the description lacks information about return values, error conditions, or any effects beyond toggling. In the absence of an output schema and annotations, a bit more context would improve completeness, though the low complexity keeps it adequate.

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% with the 'id' parameter described as 'The task UUID', so the schema fully documents the parameter. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, but none are needed since the schema is complete.

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 'Toggle a task's completion status' clearly states the specific verb (toggle) and resource (task completion status), distinguishing it from sibling tools like update_task or assign_task. The purpose is unambiguous and directly reflects the tool's name.

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 the tool is used to flip a task's done/completion status, but it does not explicitly say when to prefer it over alternatives like update_task. There is no mention of exclusions or context, but the usage is reasonably inferable from the action itself.

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