Create or update a follow-up task in a Rootr CRM

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) indicate mutation but not destruction. The description adds context about linking to contacts/companies/deals and knowledge graph auto-linking. No contradiction.

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, no fluff. Front-loaded with core action. Excellent economy of words.

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?

Covers core usage and context, but omits return value and error handling. Given no output schema, some missing info. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 description clarifies the crucial taskId parameter's role and provides an example. With 70% schema coverage, it adds meaning beyond schema for the upsert behavior, though not all parameters are addressed.

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 tool creates or updates follow-up tasks, specifying the upsert pattern. It distinguishes from sibling CRM upsert tools (company, contact, deal) by focusing on tasks.

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 explains when to include taskId (update) vs omit (create) and gives an example of setting status to done. However, it does not explicitly compare to other tools like list_tasks or log_activity, leaving some ambiguity.

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