createAsanaComment

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the core action (create) and the 'story' terminology, but fails to mention any side effects, return values, permissions, or idempotency. This is a minimal disclosure for a mutation tool.

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?

The description is a single, well-structured sentence. It front-loads the action and resource, includes the helpful Asana-specific clarification '(story)', and contains no unnecessary information.

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 tool is simple with complete parameter documentation, but the lack of annotations and output schema means the description should explain more about what the user can expect. It does not mention return values or any behavioral constraints, leaving some gaps, but it is adequate for a straightforward create-comment operation.

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 input schema covers 100% of parameters with clear descriptions for both taskId and text. The tool description adds no additional semantic insight beyond what the schema already provides, so the 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?

The description clearly states the action (creates), the resource (a comment/story), and the target (specified Asana task). It distinguishes the tool from sibling comment tools by explicitly naming Asana, making its purpose immediately clear.

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 provides clear context: this tool is for adding comments to Asana tasks. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the platform-specific wording implies when to use it, earning a 4 rather than a 5.

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