nworks_task_create

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, and the description does not contradict them. It adds valuable context beyond annotations: OAuth scope requirement (task + user.read) and default self-assignment. It does not detail response format or side effects, but for a create operation with no output schema, this is acceptable.

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?

Two sentences, each earning its place: the first states the action and example requests, the second covers default assignment and auth. Action is front-loaded, no fluff.

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?

For a create tool with no output schema, the description covers trigger phrases, default behavior, and auth requirements. It does not explicitly state the return value (e.g., created task object or ID), but that is a minor gap for a creation operation where the agent often only needs to confirm success.

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 schema covers all 6 parameters with descriptions, including inline defaults for userId and assigneeIds. The description restates the self-assignment default but does not add new parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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 it creates a new TODO and gives concrete natural-language trigger phrases ('할 일 추가해줘', 'TODO 등록해줘'). It also clarifies the default self-assignment, distinguishing it from sibling update/delete operations by explicitly naming the 'create' action.

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?

Provides explicit usage triggers and the default assignment context. However, it does not mention alternatives like nworks_task_update for modifying existing tasks, leaving the agent to infer when not to use this tool. A brief 'use task_update to modify' would elevate it.

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