Get Recrawl Tasks

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full behavioral burden and discloses almost nothing: not whether results are paginated by default, how many tasks are returned, or the ordering. The only behavioral signal is the implicit read-only nature of 'get', which the agent must infer.

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 short sentence, front-loaded and free of waste. It is concise rather than bloated, though the brevity comes at the cost of detail captured in other dimensions.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the schema fully documents parameters. Still, for a 6-parameter, host-scoped listing tool with several close siblings, the definition omits scope, relation to alternatives, and pagination behavior.

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 description coverage is 100%, so every parameter (limit, offset, date_from, date_to, host_id, user_id) is already documented in the schema with formats and defaults. The description adds no extra meaning, 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?

The description names a clear verb ('get') and resource ('list of recrawl tasks'), so the basic intent is legible. However, it does not distinguish this tool from nearby siblings such as get_recrawl_task_status, get_recrawl_quota, or request_recrawl, nor does it indicate that results are scoped to a single host/user despite the required host_id and user_id.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus get_recrawl_task_status (single task) or get_recrawl_quota. No prerequisites, no mention that user_id/host_id are required to scope the listing, and no exclusions.

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