task_start

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

Adds 'persistent cross-session' context beyond annotations, implying the task persists across sessions. However, it does not disclose side effects, prerequisites, or error conditions, and annotations only provide idempotentHint=false.

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 sentence, which is concise but lacks essential parameter information. It is appropriately short but under-specified for a tool with two required parameters.

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?

Despite the presence of an output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not explain what happens upon starting a task, return value expectations, or integration with sibling tools like task_checkpoint.

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 has 0% coverage in description, and the description provides no explanation for the two parameters (projectId, goal). The agent gets no guidance on parameter meaning or format beyond the schema.

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 uses specific verb 'Start' and resource 'persistent cross-session project task', clearly indicating the action. It distinguishes from sibling task tools like task_checkpoint and task_list, though it does not explicitly differentiate.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as task_checkpoint or project_open. Lacks any when-to-use or when-not-to-use information.

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