task_move

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

With no annotations, the description is expected to disclose behavioral traits. It only states the effect (repositioning) but does not mention side effects (e.g., does it affect subtask relationships?), permissions required, or reversibility. The lack of detail leaves the agent uninformed about consequences.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the core action and the two placement options.

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?

Given 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. It omits details about required parameters, the meaning of 'tasklist_id', and the absence of return value or side effects. The tool's behavior is only partially described.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning for 'parent' (as subtask) and 'previous' (after in list), but does not explain 'account', 'task_id', or 'tasklist_id' (though the latter has a default). The explanation is partially helpful but incomplete.

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 the specific verb 'Reposition' and identifies the resource as 'task', clearly indicating it moves a task. It distinguishes from siblings like task_update or task_complete by specifying the repositioning action and the two ways to do it (under parent as subtask, after previous).

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 repositioning tasks but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like task_update (which could also modify positions) or when not to use it. No exclusions or context are provided.

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