task_list

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

With no annotations, the description fully explains the read behavior, return format, and the truncation mechanism. It discloses that the tool returns a limited set and advises on handling pagination, which is critical transparency for a list operation.

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 structured with a clear purpose, return format explanation, and parameter list. It is slightly lengthy but every sentence adds value; the bullet-style for parameters aids reading without being verbose.

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 three parameters and no output schema, the description covers the return structure, pagination handling, and parameter semantics. It does not specify default ordering or max allowable limit, but overall it is sufficiently complete for an 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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage (no descriptions in JSON Schema), so the description carries full burden. It explains each parameter: status (optional filter with example values), limit (default 200), and target (optional, omit for default). This adds significant meaning beyond the raw 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 starts with '[READ]' and clearly states it lists XO tasks optionally filtered by status. This distinguishes it from sibling list tools (e.g., host_list, vm_list) by specifying the resource (tasks) and the filtering capability.

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 clear guidance on when to re-run with a higher limit or narrower filter when truncated is true. It does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool, but the context of sibling tools (many list tools) gives implicit alternatives.

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