clokio_list_task_labels

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

Annotations already state readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds return-content detail (names and colors) but discloses no additional behavioral traits such as pagination, auth requirements, or scope. It is consistent with annotations, not contradictory.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, with no filler. Every word earns its place.

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 parameterless read-only list, the description covers the core need: it states the resource and the returned data (names and colors). Without an output schema, a bit more detail—such as whether labels are project-scoped or include archived labels—would make it fully complete, but it is adequate as-is.

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 schema has zero parameters and 100% schema description coverage, so there is nothing for the description to add. Per the baseline for parameterless tools, a 4 is appropriate.

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?

Description starts with a specific verb 'List' and a specific resource 'available task labels (tags)', and adds the returned fields 'names and colors'. This clearly separates it from sibling tools like clokio_list_task_statuses and clokio_list_projects, even without naming them.

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?

No guidance on when to choose this tool over the many sibling list tools, such as clokio_list_task_statuses or clokio_list_projects. The intended context is implied by the resource name, but there is no explicit when/when-not or alternative routing.

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