gws.tasks.create

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

The description adds important behavioral details beyond the annotations: the RFC3339 timestamp's time portion is discarded, the tasklist defaults to '@default', and the tool returns the new task's title, due, and ID. The annotations already indicate a non-read-only, non-idempotent write tool, and the description enriches this with useful concrete behavior.

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 three focused sentences, front-loaded with the core action and immediately followed by essential details about required parameters, defaults, and return values. There is no filler or repetition.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by naming the return fields (title, due date, ID). It also clarifies a subtle Google Tasks behavior and the default task list context, making the tool self-sufficient for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 input schema provides descriptions for all five parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantic context by clarifying the due date storage behavior and the tasklist default, giving the agent deeper understanding than the schema alone.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Create') and a clear resource ('a new task in a task list'), and it clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling task tools like gws.tasks.list, gws.tasks.complete, and gws.tasks.delete. It also names key behaviors and defaults that make the purpose unmistakable.

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 makes it obvious this tool is for creating tasks, and the sibling tool names provide clear alternatives for reading, completing, or deleting tasks. It does not explicitly say 'use this instead of X', but the context and defaulting behavior provide adequate usage guidance without confusion.

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