create-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 discloses one behavioral issue: the targetDate/due_date field may be ignored by the API. However, this information is also present in the schema parameter description, so the description adds minimal additional context. It does not mention return behavior, error conditions, or permissions.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and includes a relevant caveat. 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?

The tool has 5 parameters and 2 required, with no output schema. The description does not explain what the tool returns, potential errors (e.g., case not found), or any prerequisites. However, the schema fully documents parameters, so completeness is acceptable but not rich.

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 per-parameter descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description's note about targetDate being ignored is redundant with the schema's due_date description, and uses a different field name (targetDate vs due_date), which could cause confusion.

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 action (create) and the resource (a task on a case), using a specific verb and object. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create-note (different resource) and list-tasks (different operation).

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 does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. While the context is clear (use when creating a task), there is no guidance on when not to use this vs other tools, such as list-tasks for reading.

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