duplicate_task

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

With no annotations, the description must cover behavior. It states the copy includes name, description, status, priority, assignees, tags, and dates, but does not mention attachments, subtasks, comments, or custom fields. It also omits authentication requirements and potential side effects.

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 concise with two sentences, front-loading the action and key details without unnecessary 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?

Given the tool's complexity (re-creating a task), the description is incomplete. It does not specify whether subtasks, attachments, or comments are copied, nor does it clarify if the copy is shallow or deep. Without an output schema, more detail on the return value would be beneficial.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the default naming behavior for the 'name' parameter ('<name> (copy)'), which goes beyond the schema's description.

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 explicitly states it duplicates a task into a target list by reading and re-creating it, listing the copied fields. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_task, update_task, and move_bulk_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 implies usage when you need a copy of a task into another list, but does not explicitly provide when-to-use vs alternatives or any exclusions. Guidance is implicit rather than stated.

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