task_insights

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only implies read-only behavior via 'Get' but doesn't disclose any side effects, data aggregation behavior, or performance implications. It doesn't mention whether it respects project_id filtering or how metrics are computed.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words. Every word earns its place.

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?

While the description conveys the general purpose, it lacks details about the output format or what specific metrics are included. With no output schema, this leaves the agent without a clear picture of the response. However, for a simple analytics tool with two optional parameters, it's minimally viable.

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?

Both parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage), so the schema already explains 'days' and 'project_id'. The description adds no additional parameter context, but none is needed given the schema's clarity.

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 ('Get') and identifies the resource ('task analytics and velocity metrics'), clearly distinguishing it from task CRUD siblings like get_tasks and update_task. It lacks details like scope, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_tasks or task_board. The description implies it's for metrics, but doesn't explicitly state exclusions or scenarios where this tool is preferred.

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