Reopen tasks

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

Annotations already cover idempotency (idempotentHint: true), non-read-only nature, and non-destructive nature. The description only adds 'Safe to repeat', which is redundant with idempotentHint. No additional context about side effects, permissions, or error cases is provided.

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?

Single sentence, 11 words. It is efficiently front-loaded and contains no filler.

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 mutation tool with strong annotations and full schema coverage, the description is adequate. It could benefit from naming the inverse relationship to complete_tasks, but it's not necessary for basic usage.

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 full descriptions for both parameters (100% coverage), so the description does not need to elaborate. It adds no extra semantic meaning beyond 'one or more' matching the task_ids array.

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 uses a specific verb ('Mark... as not done again') and clearly identifies the resource (completed tasks) and scope (one or more). It distinguishes from sibling 'complete_tasks' by describing the inverse action.

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 usage for reopening completed tasks but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'update_task' or 'complete_tasks'. No exclusion criteria are given.

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