Create Task

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

Annotations already declare write/non-destructive/non-idempotent/open-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond that: the cross-parameter dependency between repeat_flag and start_date, and the kanban restriction on column_id.

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?

Front-loads the operation and required args in one sentence, then a note, then a focused Args block. It is not bloated, but the Args list is selectively incomplete, which slightly undercuts its structure.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, and the conditional requirements are covered. However, for a 15-parameter tool at 0% schema coverage, the unexplained formats and value ranges (priority, dates, reminders) leave meaningful gaps 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 0% across 15 parameters, so the description carries the full burden, yet it only documents column_id, kind, sort_order, and the items substructure. Fields like priority (integer scale unknown), due_date/start_date format, reminders, tags, and the desc-vs-content distinction are left unexplained.

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+resource ('Create a task') and names the two required parameters, so the agent immediately knows the operation. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling dida365_batch_create_tasks, which an agent could easily confuse for bulk creation.

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?

Gives concrete conditional guidance: repeat_flag requires start_date, column_id requires a kanban-view project, and kind should be CHECKLIST when items are passed. These are real preconditions rather than vague suggestions, though there is no routing guidance versus batch_create_tasks.

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