Add items

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

Annotations already show this is a write (readOnlyHint=false) and non-idempotent. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: it is a batch operation and item ordering matters because later items can parent to earlier names. It does not disclose failure/rollback behavior, but for a simple creation tool this is reasonable.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action and then the ordering detail. Every sentence adds value with no filler or repetition of schema fields.

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 one-parameter tool with an output schema and a described items schema, the description plus schema is mostly sufficient: it explains batching and parent-name ordering. The only minor gap is that per-item required fields are left open (schema allows additionalProperties), but sibling tools like add_task/add_project can fill that in.

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?

The schema already covers the items parameter with a description of tasks/projects and parentTaskName usage (100% coverage). The tool description adds little beyond echoing that language, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 action ('Create many tasks or projects') and resource ('in one OmniJS call'), which clearly distinguishes add_items from the single-item add_task and add_project siblings. It also adds the batching nuance that later items can reference earlier names.

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 use case: use when you need to create many tasks/projects in one call, particularly with parent relationships. However, it never explicitly names alternatives or says when not to use this tool, leaving the comparison to add_task/add_project implicit.

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