annotate_task

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

No annotations provided, but description carries burden well by disclosing critical side effects: 'auto-claims, renews lease'. Missing details on failure modes, return values, or idempotency, but the side-effect disclosure is valuable.

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?

Extremely concise (11 words). Front-loaded with action verb. Every element earns its place: action, synonym clarification, target, and critical side effects in parentheses. Zero waste.

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?

Good coverage for a 3-parameter mutation tool: explains action and side effects. Lacks description of return value or success/failure behavior (no output schema exists to guide this), but the core behavioral disclosure compensates partially.

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 has 100% description coverage (id, agent_id, annotation all documented). Description doesn't add parameter-specific semantics beyond schema, which is acceptable baseline when schema coverage is high. No additional syntax or format guidance provided.

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?

Clear specific verb ('Add') with resource ('annotation/note') and target ('task'). Distinct from siblings like update_task (general fields) and create_task (new tasks). The parenthetical side-effects further clarify unique behavior.

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?

Implies usage for adding notes to existing tasks, but lacks explicit when-to-use vs alternatives (particularly update_task which may handle general task modifications). No explicit exclusions or prerequisites mentioned.

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