set_date

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it delivers almost nothing: no statement of permissions, side effects (does setting a date move the task between columns?), reversibility, or idempotency. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage this is a significant gap.

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?

Front-loaded with the operation, then the parameter notes in two short sentences; nothing is padded. The format reminders duplicate the schema descriptions, costing it a point.

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?

With 7 parameters, 4 required, no annotations, and no output schema, the description should cover prerequisites and return behavior, but it addresses only 3 of 7 parameters and omits status, dateType, task_id, and board_name entirely. It is not sufficient to invoke the tool correctly with confidence.

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 coverage is only 43% (status, dateType, task_id, target_column_id are undocumented in the schema), so the description should compensate, but it only names three parameters. Worse, it labels target_column_id as optional while the schema marks it required, which is actively misleading and could cause malformed calls.

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?

States a concrete verb and resource ('Set or update the due date on a task'), so the agent knows exactly what operation is performed. However, it offers no differentiation from siblings such as get_dates or update_task, which also touch task dates/fields.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this instead of update_task or get_dates, nor any preconditions (e.g., must the task/board exist, must the target column accept dates). The single inference an agent can draw is the required/optional parameter split.

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