Поставить задачу

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

Adds substantial behavior beyond annotations: returns task_id, defaults the responsible to the webhook owner when unset, requires BITRIX24_WEBHOOK_URL with specific scopes (crm, task, user), and states the 2 req/s rate limit is handled automatically. These are meaningful operational facts the agent cannot infer from the write/non-idempotent hints alone.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and lead sentence follows logically through behavior, consent, and auth. Dense but each sentence earns its place; the consent instruction is slightly emphatic but operationally relevant.

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 7-param create tool with no output schema, the description covers return value (task_id), defaults, auth, rate limits, and the mutation-safety requirement. Nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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?

With schema coverage at 86%, the baseline is 3, but the description adds real value: the default responsible_id behavior (webhook owner) is not documented in the schema, and the CRM-linking semantics of deal_id/lead_id/contact_id are explained.

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 and resource ('Ставит задачу сотруднику') and clarifies the optional CRM linking (deal/lead/contact). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like b24_tasks (listing) and b24_complete_task (closing).

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?

Gives clear context: which entity types it can attach to, the default assignee behavior, and a consent requirement before mutating data. It does not explicitly name when to prefer it over alternatives, but the use case is unambiguous.

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