Search Tasks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context by specifying that it matches against title, content, and subtask titles across all active projects, but it doesn't explicitly state that it's read-only or what the return format is. The lack of output schema makes this a minor gap.

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 concise sentences that are front-loaded with the verb. Every word contributes meaning, with no redundancy or filler, making it highly efficient.

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 one-parameter search tool, the description covers the essential behavior and scope. Although there is no output schema to explain return values, the purpose is clear enough that an agent can infer the tool returns matching tasks. It could be slightly more complete by explicitly mentioning output, but the current description is adequate.

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 describes the query parameter only as 'Search text to match against task titles and content', but the description adds that it also matches subtask titles and operates across all active projects. This goes beyond the schema and provides additional meaning.

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 opens with 'Search for tasks by text', clearly identifying the verb and target. It further specifies that it matches title, content, and subtask titles across all active projects, making its scope distinct from sibling tools like get_all_tasks.

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 context for when to use this tool: when searching tasks by text across all active projects. However, it does not mention alternatives or situations where it should not be used, such as when filtering by structured criteria (for which filter_tasks might be more appropriate).

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