tasks_ready

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

Annotations declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive. The description adds behavioral details: the ordering (oldest first), the inclusion of blocked tasks with their blockers, and the default exclusion of plan-step tasks. It adds significant context beyond the annotations without contradiction.

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: first defines the core functionality and ordering, second explains the plan parameter behavior. Every sentence is necessary and no redundant information. Efficiently packed.

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 no output schema, the description adequately hints at the return format (list of ready/blocked tasks). It covers inputs and core behavior. Missing details like pagination or limits, but these are reasonable omissions for a simple list tool. Overall sufficient for an AI agent to use correctly.

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 already describes both parameters with 100% coverage. The description adds meaning by explaining the effect of the plan parameter (include plan steps instead of default) and that project defaults to the bound session. This enhances understanding but is not strictly necessary given the schema.

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 lists actionable (ready) tasks for a project, defines 'ready' as open tasks with no unfinished blocker, specifies ordering (oldest first), and distinguishes from the default non-plan tasks vs plan-step tasks via the plan parameter. This is specific and differentiates from siblings like tasks_list.

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 explicitly states when to use the plan parameter (to get plan-step tasks) and that by default plan steps are excluded. However, it does not directly contrast with alternatives like tasks_list, leaving some ambiguity about when to prefer this tool over listing all tasks.

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