planka_create_tasks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the mutation ('Add') but does not disclose what happens to existing tasks, whether the operation is idempotent, what response is returned, or any authorization requirements. This is a significant gap for a mutation 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?

One sentence, no filler, with the action and target front-loaded. Every word earns its place.

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 simple, two-parameter tool with a fully described schema, the description plus schema is largely sufficient for invocation. It does not cover behavioral edge cases like duplicate task names or whether an existing checklist is appended to, but the low complexity makes this minor.

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 cardId and tasks. The description only reinforces 'one or more' and 'to a card' without adding syntax, format, or relationship details, which matches the baseline 3.

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?

States a specific verb ('Add'), resource ('tasks'), and clarifies they are checklist items attached to a card. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_card or update_task, so an agent can identify the operation immediately.

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 implies when to use the tool—when adding one or more checklist tasks to a card—but gives no explicit guidance about alternatives or exclusion criteria. It does not mention update_task/delete_task or clarify prerequisites such as card existence.

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