ghl_contact_update_task_completed

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

The description repeats the action title and includes endpoint and OAuth scopes, but adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations already provide (idempotentHint, destructiveHint). It does not explain effects like whether it overwrites or toggles completion status.

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 very concise but lacks substantive information. It is front-loaded with the title and includes endpoint details, but could be better structured to provide more value without increasing length.

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 has 3 required parameters, no output schema, and annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain how the tool relates to contact tasks, what the response looks like, or differentiate from similar tools.

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 has 100% description coverage and clearly documents all three parameters (contactId, taskId, body with completed field). The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so baseline 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 'Update Task Completed' which indicates the action of updating a task's completion status. However, it does not distinguish from the sibling tool 'ghl_contact_update_task', which likely updates other fields, missing an opportunity to specify scope.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'ghl_contact_update_task' or 'ghl_contact_create_task'. The description lacks context for appropriate usage.

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