Complete Task

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

Annotations already signal a non-read-only mutation, and the description adds valuable detail on the exact mutations performed: updating task status, optionally creating an artifact node, and linking via a produces relationship. This goes beyond the schema and annotations by explaining the multi-step 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 a single, tightly-worded sentence that front-loads the key action and includes all essential behavior without redundancy. No filler or unnecessary details.

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 description adequately explains the core workflow and optional artifact creation, with schema covering all parameters. However, it does not mention return values or error behavior, which are relevant since no output schema is present.

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 baseline is 3. The description mentions 'artifact node' and 'produces relationship', but it does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides for fields like artifact_title and task_id.

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 tool's function with specific actions: 'updates task status to done, optionally creates an artifact node, and links them via a produces relationship.' It distinguishes this from generic tools like update_node or add_edge by describing a combined, single-turn completion workflow.

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 phrase 'Single-turn task completion' implies when this tool should be used, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. No guidance is given about when to prefer this over separate update_node/add_node/add_edge calls.

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