List tasks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'list tasks' implying read-only behavior but does not disclose pagination behavior (cursor/limit), rate limits, or any side effects. The minimal description lacks behavioral depth.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core action ('List tasks') and secondary info ('optionally filtered...').

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?

Given the tool has 4 optional parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It omits pagination mechanics (cursor, limit) and does not mention default behavior or sorting. A list tool with pagination requires more context to be fully usable.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It explains that workerId and status are filters, adding meaning beyond the schema. However, it does not explain the limit and cursor parameters (pagination), leaving half the parameters undocumented in the description.

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 the tool lists tasks with optional filters by worker or status. It distinguishes from sibling tools like task_get (singular) and task_create, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 mentions optional filtering by worker or status, but does not explicitly specify when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., task_get for a single task). No exclusions or when-not guidance provided.

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