create_task_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It states that a new task list is created and that the return is a confirmation message with the list ID and details. This covers the primary side effect and return. However, it does not mention authentication requirements, potential errors, or whether the operation is irreversible. For a simple create tool, the disclosure is adequate but not rich.

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 concise and well-structured. It starts with a one-sentence purpose, followed by an Args section and a Returns section. No unnecessary words or repetition. Each sentence earns its place.

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 the tool's simplicity (two parameters, no annotations), the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, required arguments, and return value. It is complete enough for an agent to invoke correctly. Minor gaps include lack of usage alternatives and error handling, but these are not critical for a straightforward create operation.

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 only parameter names and types (two strings) with no descriptions. The description compensates by explaining each: 'user_google_email' is 'The user's Google email address. Required.' and 'title' is 'The title of the new task list.' This adds clear meaning beyond the schema, fully covering both parameters.

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 action: 'Create a new task list.' The verb 'create' and resource 'task list' are specific, and it is distinct from siblings like create_task, which creates a task within a list, and list_task_lists, which reads. The purpose is unambiguous.

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 by clearly naming the operation, but it does not explicitly explain when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_task or list_task_lists. There is no mention of exclusions or prerequisites. The usage context is inferred from the name and purpose.

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