karea_link_resource_to_task

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

No annotations provided, so description must compensate. It discloses a constraint (same user/project scope) and usage pattern (once per task for multiple links). Lacks details on side effects (e.g., overwriting, limits), but is adequate for a linking operation.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the main action. Every sentence adds essential information, no wasted words.

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 no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose, constraints, and usage pattern for single or multiple links. Could mention prerequisite that resource and task exist, but overall complete for a simple linking tool.

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 covers all 3 parameters. Description adds value by explaining that 'task' can be name, visual ID, or UUID, and that 'projectId' helps resolve visual IDs. This goes beyond the schema's basic type descriptions.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'Link' and the resource and task objects. Provides examples (release notes, design docs) and distinguishes from siblings by specifying the scope constraint and multiple task handling.

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?

Explicitly says when to use (attach references) and how to handle multiple tasks ('call once per task'). Does not mention when not to use or alternatives beyond the hint, but provides sufficient guidance.

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