tasks_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states this is a list operation with filtering, implying read-only behavior, but doesn't disclose pagination behavior (limit/after parameters suggest cursor-based pagination), rate limits, authentication requirements, or what 'all tasks' means in context (e.g., accessible to current user). The description is minimal and lacks behavioral details needed for safe invocation.

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?

Extremely concise with a single sentence that front-loads the core purpose. No wasted words or redundant information. The structure is optimal for a basic description, though it could benefit from additional context.

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 5 parameters with 0% schema coverage, no annotations, no output schema, and sibling tools like tasks_search, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain parameter meanings, return format, pagination, or when to use versus alternatives. For a list tool with filtering capabilities, this leaves significant gaps for an AI agent to understand and invoke correctly.

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 0%, so parameters are undocumented in schema. The description only mentions 'optional filtering' generically, without explaining any of the 5 parameters (limit, after, properties, associations, archived). It doesn't clarify what 'properties' refers to, what 'associations' does, or how 'archived' affects results. The description adds minimal value beyond the bare schema.

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 'List all tasks with optional filtering' clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('tasks'), and specifies scope ('all') with capability ('optional filtering'). It distinguishes from siblings like tasks_get (single task) and tasks_search (search with criteria), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from tasks_batch_read (batch retrieval). The purpose is specific and actionable.

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 use this tool versus alternatives like tasks_search or tasks_batch_read. The description mentions 'optional filtering' but doesn't specify what filtering options exist or when to prefer this over search tools. There's no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions for usage.

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