create_task

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

There are no annotations, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic create action and omits details about response format, default list selection, required permissions, or side effects. An agent cannot anticipate what happens after creation or what output to expect.

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 concise sentence that is easy to read and front-loaded. It contains no unnecessary words, but it also provides little content beyond the tool name, making it efficient but semantically thin.

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 10 parameters and no output schema, this is a complex operation. The description only covers the basic action and does not explain the creation flow, the meaning of optional parameters in context, or what the return value indicates. This is insufficient for an agent to confidently invoke the tool for non-trivial use cases.

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 100% coverage for all 10 parameters with descriptive Japanese names and explanations (e.g., list_id, due_date, priority). The description adds no parameter details, but since the schema does the heavy lifting, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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) and resource (task) in Japanese: 'ClickUpでタスクを作成します。' However, it essentially restates the tool name and does not differentiate from sibling tools that also operate on tasks (e.g., update_task, delete_task), so it adds minimal new information.

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. It does not mention that this is for creating new tasks as opposed to updating or deleting, nor does it reference any sibling tools or contexts where another tool would be more appropriate.

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