List Subtasks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds semantic context by emphasizing that cardId is the parent and the result is child cards, but it does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as return shape, ordering, or pagination.

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?

Three tight sentences that each serve a purpose: function, parent/child disambiguation, and routing to alternatives. There is no filler or redundancy.

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 simple read-only list operation with two parameters and no output schema, the description provides enough: it names the result (child cards) and points to an alternative for embedded children. Minor missing details like returned fields are acceptable given the low complexity and supportive annotations.

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 100%, including cardId's parent role and the verbosity enum/default. The description reinforces cardId as parent and output as children but does not add new parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific action ('List') and resource ('child cards linked to a parent card'), and explicitly differentiates from kaiten_get_card with includeChildren. The parent/child clarification removes ambiguity with siblings such as kaiten_get_card.

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?

Names the alternative kaiten_get_card(cardId, includeChildren=true) and notes where new children are created (kaiten_create_card + kaiten_attach_subtask). It lacks an explicit rule for when to prefer this flat list over the embedded alternative, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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