reclaim_mark_incomplete

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

Annotations include idempotentHint: true, which is consistent. The description adds behavioral context by explaining that marking incomplete unarchives and moves back to planner, disclosing side effects beyond annotations.

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?

Single sentence, concise, no redundant words. The example parenthetical adds clarity without bloat.

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 simple tool (1 param, no output schema, with annotations), the description covers purpose and behavior sufficiently. However, it could mention return behavior or error conditions.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema's parameter description; it only rephrases 'unarchive' which is already in 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 a specific verb ('marks') and resource ('task') with a clear state ('incomplete'). It also provides examples ('unarchives it, moves it back to the planner'), distinguishing it from siblings like reclaim_mark_complete and reclaim_delete_task.

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 lacks any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as reclaim_mark_complete or reclaim_delete_task. No when-not conditions or context are provided.

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