add_task_dependency

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the effect (blocking dependency) and the return (confirmation), but lacks details on error handling, permission requirements, or constraints like circular dependency prevention. This is adequate but not thorough.

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 concise sentences: purpose, parameter usage, and return outcome. Every sentence adds value without redundancy. The information is front-loaded and easily parsed.

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 no output schema, the mention of 'Returns a confirmation' is sufficient. The description covers the primary behavior and the key parameter rule. Minor gaps exist, such as missing details on what the confirmation contains or when dependencies might fail, but overall it is complete enough for a straightforward mutation tool.

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% with descriptions for all 5 parameters. The description adds value by clarifying the mutual exclusivity of depends_on and dependency_of, which is not evident from the schema alone. This helps the agent choose correctly.

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 ('Create a blocking dependency') and the resource ('between tasks'). It also distinguishes from sibling tools like 'delete_task_dependency' and 'add_task_link' by specifying the exact role of depends_on and dependency_of.

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 key guidance: 'Exactly one is required' for the depends_on/dependency_of parameters, which is critical for correct invocation. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or what prerequisites (e.g., existing tasks) are needed.

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