Create a Task

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false. The description adds no behavioral detail beyond 'Create', such as whether it returns the created task, requires permissions, or what happens with duplicate titles. It provides minimal incremental value over the annotations.

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 sentence, front-loaded with action and scope, lists optional fields efficiently. No wasted words.

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 7-parameter schema with full descriptions and annotations that mark it as a non-destructive write, the one-sentence description is adequate for basic invocation. However, it lacks context about prerequisite plan existence or return value, but the schema covers the required parameters, so it's largely complete.

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 100%, and the description merely paraphrases the schema's parameter list without adding new semantics (e.g., it says 'assignees' rather than adding the need to use planner_find_user, which is already in the schema).

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?

Description clearly states 'Create a Planner task in a plan' – specific verb (create), resource (Planner task), and scope (in a plan). It distinguishes from siblings like planner_create_bucket and planner_update_task.

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?

Provides clear context for when to use (adding a new task to a plan) but doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions. Sibling tools like planner_update_task are not mentioned, so it stops short of explicit guidance.

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