create_task

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses useful behavioral traits: 'Returns summary by default; set verbose=true for full data' and the tag validation rule. However, it does not mention permissions, failure modes, or reversibility, leaving some gaps.

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, consisting of two sentences that front-load the primary purpose, then add necessary constraints and return-behavior details. Every sentence serves a purpose with no redundancy.

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 complexity (8 parameters), lack of annotations, and absence of an output schema, the description is too sparse. It omits details about required parameters, error handling, and the composition of the summary, making it incomplete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning to 'tags' (must be existing IDs) and 'verbose' (controls response detail), but it does not explain dueDate, assignee, priority, or the required fields beyond their names. The coverage is insufficient for 8 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 tool's primary action: 'Create a new task in a project.' This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_task, get_task, and delete_task. 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 through the tool name and provides a key prerequisite ('tags must be existing tag IDs from the same project'), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or include exclusions. Guidance is present but mostly implicit.

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