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

The annotations already declare readOnly and idempotent, and the description adds meaningful behavioral detail: tasks are bucketed overdue/today/upcoming, ordered most-urgent-first, and include per-bucket counts. Since there is no output schema, this description effectively carries the burden of explaining what the caller will receive.

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?

A single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core purpose, includes filtering, ordering, and grouping details, and ends with a practical pointer to the completion sibling. Every clause earns its place.

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 zero-parameter, read-only list operation, the description completely covers scope, filtering, ordering, grouping, and output counts. It also gives the agent the next step for acting on a task, making it fully actionable without additional context.

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 zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to define. The phrase 'caller's' implies implicit authentication/context, but no parameter semantics are required. Baseline 4 is appropriate for a zero-parameter tool.

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?

Description uses a specific verb ('List'), names the exact resource ('caller's open sales tasks'), and defines the activity filter ('type task not yet done'). The bucketed output description further distinguishes it from other list tools like list_deals or list_invoices.

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 clearly conveys that this is for viewing the caller's open sales tasks and even points to the sibling tool 'complete_sales_task' for closing one. It doesn't explicitly discuss when not to use this tool, but the context is clear enough for selection.

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