base_wework_create_tasklistCreate a new tasklist column in a Base.vn project to organize tasks into stages such as Backlog, Testing, or Done.
Tạo danh sách công việc (Tasklist/Column) mới trong dự án (ví dụ: 'Sprint 24 Backlog', 'Testing', 'Done').
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | ||
| content | No | ||
| username | No | ||
| project_id | Yes | ||
| access_token | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
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 must carry behavioral disclosure. It states a create/mutation action but does not mention required permissions, authentication expectations, side effects, or reversibility. The description adds only the project context and examples.
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?
One focused sentence with no filler, a clear front-loaded verb, and useful examples that help an agent understand the expected values for 'name'.
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?
Although an output schema exists, this is a mutation tool with 5 parameters and no annotations. The description omits optional parameter semantics, authentication context, and any guidance on when this tool is appropriate versus alternatives, so an agent lacks enough context for robust 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 0%, and the description does not clarify the meaning of project_id, name, content, username, or access_token. The examples imply a name value, but no parameter is actually explained beyond what the schema property names already reveal.
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 action ('Tạo' = create), the resource ('Tasklist/Column'), and the container ('trong dự án' = in a project), with concrete examples like 'Sprint 24 Backlog'. This is immediately distinguishable from sibling tools like base_wework_create_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?
Usage is implied by the description: use this when creating a new task list/column in a project. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or point to alternative tools, leaving the agent to infer the boundary.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.