motion_custom_fields

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains the different parameter requirements per operation, including the distinction between fieldId and valueId, and conditional requirement for options. However, it does not mention side effects or destructive 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?

Single paragraph efficiently lists required parameters per operation. No redundant information; every sentence adds value.

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?

Covers all operations and their required parameters, but lacks details on return values or what each operation actually does beyond parameter requirements. Given no output schema, a bit more detail on behavior would help.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds significant value by summarizing which parameters are required for each operation, which is not captured in the schema's individual 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?

Clearly states it manages custom fields for tasks and projects, and lists the specific operations (list, create, delete, add/remove from project/task). This differentiates it from sibling tools like motion_tasks or motion_projects.

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?

Explicitly specifies the required parameters for each operation, guiding the agent on when to use each variant. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the context of custom field management is clear.

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