asana_create_task

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Create a new task' implies a write/mutation operation, but the description doesn't mention permissions required, whether this is idempotent, rate limits, error conditions, or what happens on success (e.g., returns a task ID). For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is inadequate.

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, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a basic create operation and front-loads the essential information without unnecessary elaboration.

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 mutation tool with 11 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't address what the tool returns, error handling, authentication requirements, or how it differs from similar tools. The 100% schema coverage helps with parameters, but other critical context 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 11 parameters thoroughly. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's in the schema (e.g., it doesn't explain relationships between parameters like 'project_id' vs 'projects', or provide usage examples). Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Create a new task in a project' clearly states the action (create) and resource (task), with the project context providing specificity. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'asana_create_subtask' or 'asana_update_task', which would require explicit comparison to earn a 5.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are multiple sibling tools for task creation and modification (e.g., asana_create_subtask, asana_update_task, asana_set_parent_for_task), but the description offers no context about prerequisites, when this is appropriate versus other tools, or any exclusions.

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