snooze_task

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description only restates the operation without revealing side effects, reversibility, permissions, or what happens to the task state. 'Snooze' is vague—does it modify the due date, set a reminder, or change status? This is not disclosed.

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 sentence plus an example—every word earns its place. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, and the example reinforces usage without bloat.

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 simplicity and 100% schema coverage, the description is mostly adequate. However, as a mutation tool with no output schema or annotations, it lacks critical behavioral context such as whether the task's due date is updated or a reminder is set. This gap prevents full completeness.

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 fully covers both parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a natural language example but does not provide additional semantic detail beyond the schema. The example may even suggest accepting relative times like 'tomorrow 9am', which conflicts with the schema's ISO datetime format, but this does not add meaningful parameter understanding.

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 function with a specific verb ('snooze') and resource ('task'), plus the outcome ('until a future datetime'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like complete_task or update_task, which serve different purposes.

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 example 'Snooze task <id> until tomorrow 9am' provides clear context for when to use the tool. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is specific enough that agents can infer when to select it over similar task-related tools.

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