complete_task

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

无注解，描述完全依赖自身。它陈述了变更操作，但未披露任何行为细节，如权限要求、是否可逆、对关联数据的影响，或是否触发通知。

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?

简洁明了，先陈述目的，再列出参数。无冗余。

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?

对于变更操作，在无注解、无输出架构且架构描述覆盖率为 0% 的情况下，描述未能提供足够的行为上下文，以便智能体安全地调用。

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?

架构描述覆盖率为 0%，因而基线为 3。描述仅列出了 task_id 及其类型和用途，这些信息架构本身也已体现（名称和必填性），故描述未增加实质意义。

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?

清晰说明了动词+资源（'将任务标记为已完成'——将任务标记为完成），对应相邻工具中的同级操作（update_task、create_task），尽管它未明确说明与 update_task 的区别。

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?

未提供何时使用此工具而非 update_task 的指导，尤其考虑到标记任务完成可能与将状态设为'已完成'的更新操作重叠。

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