reopen_task

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden, and it only states the state transition. It says nothing about idempotency, behavior when the task is not completed, permission requirements, or potential side effects.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with a helpful parenthetical clarification ('un-complete') and no filler. Every word contributes.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter documentation, this is thin. It captures the basic action but lacks the behavioral and invocational context needed to call it with confidence in edge cases.

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 meaning to task_id or tasklist_id beyond their self-explanatory names. The two parameters' relationship (which list owns the task) is left for the agent to infer.

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 uses a specific verb ('Reopen (un-complete)') and names the resource ('completed task'), making the core operation clear. It doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling complete_task, but the parenthetical and completed-task qualifier distinguish the reverse operation.

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 phrase 'a completed task' implies the tool is for tasks that have already been completed, which is a precondition for use. However, it gives no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or alternatives such as complete_task or update_task.

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