duplicate_task

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It fails to disclose what exactly is duplicated (e.g., fields, attachments), how name conflicts are resolved, or error handling. The behavior around automatic name lookup and duplicate resolution is unclear.

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 concise with two front-loaded sentences that efficiently convey the core functionality and key usage notes. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

Given the tool has 5 parameters, no required fields, and no output schema, the description reasonably covers usage patterns and fallback options. Missing details on return value (e.g., duplicated task ID) slightly reduce completeness, but overall it provides sufficient context for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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% with detailed parameter descriptions. The tool description adds minimal extra meaning beyond summarizing name-based lookup and list creation fallback. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as it does not significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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 tool duplicates a task to a list, with specific verbs and resources. It also adds convenience features like name-based lookup, distinguishing it from sibling tools.

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?

The description explains when to use this tool for duplication and provides alternative tools for list creation (create_list, create_list_in_folder). However, it does not explicitly contrast with other task operations like create_task or move_task, leaving some guidance implicit.

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