Complete task

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

No annotations exist, so the description alone must disclose behavioral traits. It only names the state transition and says nothing about reversibility, idempotency, effects on subtasks/timestamps, or response format, which leaves meaningful ambiguity for a mutating tool.

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 extremely short and front-loaded, with no wasted words. However, it essentially restates the title ('Complete task') and adds no information, so it is under-specified rather than clearly value-adding.

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?

For a 3-parameter mutation with no output schema and no annotations, the description is incomplete: it doesn't state prerequisites, how account/tasklist selection works beyond the schema, or what happens after completion. An agent must infer context from sibling tool names and parameter names.

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%, so the schema already documents all three parameters and the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter context, but the schema's brief field descriptions for taskId, account, and tasklistId are adequate.

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 states a clear, specific action ('mark a task as completed') on a well-defined resource, so an agent can tell it completes rather than creates, deletes, or lists tasks. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings, but the action is unambiguous among the Google Tasks family.

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 verb phrase implies the intended use (when a task is done), so there is some implicit usage context. It provides no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of sibling tools like google_tasks_list for obtaining task IDs or the @default task list semantics.

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