forge_tasks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure. It does so by stating that it shows 'id, request and current phase', giving the agent an understanding of what the tool returns. It also implicitly signals a read-only operation ('Lists'). While it doesn't mention ordering or limits, the behavior is sufficiently disclosed for a zero-parameter listing tool.

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 short sentences, both informative. The main action and purpose are front-loaded ('Lists the active pipeline runs'), and the second sentence adds output details without redundancy. Every word earns its place.

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 tool with zero parameters and no output schema, the description is complete: it states what is listed, why it is used, and what fields are returned. An agent has everything needed to call this tool correctly and interpret the result.

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 has no parameters, so the baseline is 4. There are no parameters to document, and the description correctly does not invent any. Nothing more is needed here.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Lists the active pipeline runs'. It also clarifies the purpose with 'to resume from any session', which distinguishes it from siblings like forge_start or forge_status that start or check status of runs. The scope is clear and non-tautological.

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 a clear use context ('to resume from any session'), indicating when this tool is appropriate. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. Still, the context is enough for an agent to recognize this as the listing/resume discovery tool among the siblings.

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