ByteBot MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'optional filters' and 'current status' but doesn't disclose critical behavioral traits like whether this is a read-only operation, pagination behavior beyond the offset parameter, rate limits, authentication requirements, or what the return format looks like. For a list operation with no annotation coverage, this is inadequate.

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 appropriately concise with two sentences that directly address purpose and usage. No wasted words, though it could be slightly more structured by separating purpose from guidance more clearly.

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 annotations, no output schema, and 4 parameters, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (task objects, IDs only, etc.), doesn't mention pagination behavior despite having offset/limit parameters, and provides minimal behavioral context. For a list tool in a task management context, this leaves significant gaps.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already fully documents all 4 parameters with descriptions and enums. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond mentioning 'optional filters' generically, which doesn't provide value beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 the verb ('List') and resource ('tasks') with scope ('all tasks with optional filters'), making the purpose specific. It distinguishes from siblings like bytebot_get_task (single task) and bytebot_get_in_progress_task (specific status), but doesn't explicitly mention these distinctions.

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 provides implied usage guidance ('Use this to see what tasks exist and their current status'), suggesting it's for overview purposes. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives like bytebot_get_task for single tasks or bytebot_get_in_progress_task for specific status filtering.

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