card_due_date_set

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that only due-date metadata is changed and that at least one of due or dueComplete must be supplied, but it does not mention permissions, side effects, response behavior, or what happens when neither field is provided.

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?

Two tight sentences with no waste. The use condition is front-loaded, and the parameter constraint is placed immediately after it.

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?

For a simple mutation with fully described parameters and no output schema, the description supplies the key usage and validation context. A minor gap remains around return behavior and the consequence of omitting both due and dueComplete, though the latter is partially addressed.

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 the parameter baseline is 3. The description adds a meaningful constraint not enforced by the schema: at least one of due or dueComplete must be provided. It also uses 'clearing' to reinforce the schema's documented null behavior for due.

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 a specific verb and resource: setting, clearing, or marking completion of a card due date. It also scopes the operation to due-date metadata only, which distinguishes it from the broader card_update sibling.

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?

It gives clear triggering conditions: use when setting, clearing, or marking completion of a due date without changing other metadata. It implies the alternative (card_update for other fields) but does not name that sibling explicitly or state exclusions beyond the metadata constraint.

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