set_task_blocker

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains the direction and ID requirements but does not clarify the effect of toggling (e.g., whether it adds or removes a relationship, or if it's idempotent). Some behavioral details are missing.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. The primary purpose is stated first, followed by necessary details. Perfectly concise and front-loaded.

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 3 required parameters and no output schema, the description covers all parameters and provides usage guidance. It could mention whether the action is idempotent or what the response looks like, but it is largely complete for a simple toggle operation.

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 0%, so the description compensates well. It clarifies that both task IDs require database IDs and explains the direction enum semantics ('blockers' vs 'blocking'). This adds value beyond the schema's basic definitions.

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 purpose: 'Toggle a blocker relationship between two tasks.' It specifies the verb 'toggle' and the resource 'blocker relationship,' and explains the direction semantics. It is distinct from sibling tools, which do not handle blocker relationships.

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 explains when to use the tool (to toggle blocker relationships) and provides key context: direction meaning and that IDs must be database IDs from search. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but alternatives are not needed given the tool's specificity.

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