taskhub_task_create

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It reveals important side effects: all tasks default to the linked project and a warning appears when projectId differs. However, it does not mention permissions, reversibility, return value, or failure behavior.

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 compact, front-loaded with the core purpose, and uses a numbered list for the required confirmations. Every sentence contributes essential guidance without padding.

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 tool with 9 parameters and no annotations, the description covers the most important behavioral caveat (project linking) and the required user confirmations. It does not describe return values or error cases, but the schema fully documents parameters, making the definition adequate for correct invocation.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful nuance beyond the schema, especially about when to omit projectId and how projectId interacts with the linked .taskhub.json context, which is not captured in the parameter descriptions.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Create a new task.' This clearly distinguishes it from taskhub_task_update, taskhub_task_delete, and taskhub_task_complete, and the word 'new' differentiates it from task lookup tools.

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 gives explicit pre-call instructions: always ask the user to confirm task type and linked project context, and only omit projectId when explicitly told the task is unrelated to a project. It does not name alternatives or exclusion cases, but the context is clear and actionable.

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