Get Completed Tasks

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read operation and the date range filter, but omits details like default limit (visible in schema), ordering, or response format, leaving slight ambiguity about the full behavior.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core function and a brief usage tip. Every word contributes value, with no redundant information.

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 tool, the description provides the essential purpose, a use case, and mentions filtering. It lacks output format details, but since there is no output schema, this is not a major gap. The description is complete enough for tool selection and invocation.

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 fully documents all three parameters with descriptions and examples, so the description need not repeat them. It adds context by linking date range to filtering completed tasks, but does not elaborate on parameter semantics beyond that, which is adequate given 100% schema coverage.

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 retrieves tasks that are completed, using the specific verb 'Get' and resource 'completed tasks'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_tasks_due_today or get_all_tasks, which serve different retrieval purposes.

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 gives a clear use case ('reviewing what you've accomplished') and mentions optional date range filtering, helping an agent understand when to use this tool. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives, but the context is sufficient.

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