task_finalize

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the force requirement for accepted status with remaining next actions, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not explicitly mention that finalization is destructive or irreversible.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with main action. The second sentence is slightly dense but still efficient. No 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 4 parameters, no output schema, and numerous sibling tools, the description lacks details on return values, prerequisites, and the meaning of evidence/summary. It assumes knowledge of 'Task Passport' and does not explain what happens after closure.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It only partially explains force (via condition) and implicitly references status enum. Summary and evidence parameters are not described at all, leaving the agent without necessary understanding.

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 finalizes a Task Passport by setting a verification status and closing the task. It also distinguishes from sibling tool task_park, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Provides explicit guidance to use task_park for deferred work and notes the force requirement for accepted finalization with remaining next actions. However, lacks broader context against other siblings like task_update or task_status.

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