task-completed

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It indicates this is a logging/tracking action (non-destructive), but does not state any side effects, permission requirements, or behavior if called multiple times. Adequate but could be more transparent about what 'tracks your activity' means.

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 concise sentences that front-load the primary purpose. Every word is useful with no redundancy. Excellent structure.

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 simplicity of the tool (3 params, no output schema), the description covers the essential context: when to call and what it does. It could mention the relationship with sibling tools (e.g., 'use task-started to begin a task') but is otherwise complete.

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%, meaning all parameters are described in the input schema. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., enum values or field purposes). Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool is for reporting completion of tasks, answering questions, or finishing work. It uses a specific verb ('call this when you finish') and resource ('task completion tracking'). However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like 'task-started' or 'auto-task-tracker', which slightly reduces clarity.

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?

Description provides clear context on when to use: 'when you finish any task, answer a question, or complete work.' It implies this is for manual completion logging. Missing explicit guidance on when not to use or differentiation from siblings, but the intent is clear enough for an agent.

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