record_tasks

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

With no annotations, the description fully reveals side-effects (writes to file), atomic write method (tmp+rename), and validation rules (unique ids, dependency resolution, no self-deps). Also notes the host LLM responsibility for user confirmation.

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?

Three sentences, each adding critical information. No wasted words. The most important action and resource are front-loaded.

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 description covers purpose, parameters, behavior, and validation. However, it omits the return value or success indication, which is relevant since there is no output schema.

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 0%, so the description compensates well by listing the fields inside the 'tasks' array. However, it does not describe the 'workspace_root' parameter, leaving a minor gap.

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 clearly states the verb 'bulk-create' and the specific resource '.squad/tasks.json'. It lists the fields included in each task, distinguishing it from siblings like 'expand_task' (single task) or 'update_task_status'.

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 gives a usage context: 'after parsing a PRD' and a requirement to confirm with the user. It implies bulk creation rather than individual tasks, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives.

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