Add a task to Jinike's task management system with a title, due date, priority, and details to organize your work.
Create a new task in Jinike's task management system.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| title | Yes | Task title - clear and actionable | |
| dueDate | No | Due date in ISO format or natural language | |
| priority | No | Task priority (default: medium) | |
| description | No | Additional task details |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden for a mutation tool. It says nothing about permissions needed, whether duplicate tasks are detected, what happens on failure, or whether the created task is returned.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is efficient. However, the brevity leaves no room for the usage and behavioral context an agent would need, so it is under-specified rather than ideally sized.
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?
For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should say more about side effects, returns, or constraints. The schema covers inputs well, but the agent gets no guidance on the write's behavior or observable result.
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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents title, dueDate, priority (with enum and default), and description. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('Create a new task') and names the target system, so the agent knows what the tool does. It does not differentiate from siblings like complete_task, get_tasks, or create_event, which share the task-management domain.
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 indication of when to use this versus create_event or get_tasks, no prerequisites, and no statement about what is required before creating a task. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name and schema.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.