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

Annotations already declare read-only/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety bar is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond them: the default DONE exclusion, the enriched return fields (description, agentBrief, projectName, hasOpenPrompt), and the max-50 cap.

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 tightly packed sentences, front-loaded with the scoping that distinguishes it from list_my_tasks, then the reason it exists, then defaults and filters. No sentence is wasted.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema, it covers return shape, default filtering, and the filter vocabulary. The only minor gap is that the limit default (25) lives in the schema rather than the description, but the description handles the cap and behavior adequately.

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?

Schema coverage is 75%, so the description must add some meaning. It enumerates the filter set (status, projectId, includeDone, limit) and the max limit, and implicitly clarifies includeDone only matters when no status filter is set. It adds value over the bare schema, though without full default details.

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?

Specific verb+resource ("List tasks assigned to YOU") with the caller scoping explicit, and it distinguishes itself from the sibling list_my_tasks by calling itself an 'enriched variant' that returns extra fields. An agent can tell what it does and why it differs from the nearest sibling without opening a schema.

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?

States the operative use case (pick next task and start work without a follow-up get_task call) and names the sibling it supersedes (list_my_tasks), plus the default DONE exclusion. It doesn't mention other applicable siblings like next_task, but the primary when-to-use condition is clear.

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