Google Tasks 할 일 추가

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

The annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false), and the description adds useful context by specifying the return value (id and title) and the default behavior for listId (default list). It also provides the due date format. No contradictions with 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?

The description is well-structured with clear sections for Args, Returns, and Examples. Each section is concise and directly useful, with no filler or redundant content.

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?

The description covers the return value since there is no output schema, provides parameter explanations and examples, and handles a moderate number of parameters. It lacks error-handling or edge-case details, but for a simple creation tool it is sufficiently 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?

The schema covers all parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), but the description enhances this with examples for each parameter, clarifies the ISO format for due, and notes the default for listId. This adds practical meaning beyond the raw 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?

The description clearly states that it adds a new to-do to Google Tasks ('Google Tasks에 새 할 일을 추가합니다'), using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes the tool from sibling operations like listing, updating, completing, or deleting tasks.

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 provides examples of when to use the tool (e.g., adding a task with optional note or due date), but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. Sibling tool names are listed in context, but the description itself offers no comparative guidance.

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