find-tasks

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's main behavioral contribution is explaining pagination (cursor, limit) and parameter incompatibilities. It adds value beyond annotations by detailing how filters combine (AND) and the default for responsibleUserFiltering.

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 sentences: first lists filter options, second adds a constraint. It is front-loaded and concise. However, it could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points) but is still effective.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown), the description need not cover return values. It covers all filter types, constraints, and pagination basics. It is complete for a search tool, though it could mention that results are a list of tasks.

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 schema has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds extra context, e.g., explaining that filter is combined with other filters using AND, the cursor is obtained from previous calls, and the default for responsibleUserFiltering. This enriches understanding beyond the parameter descriptions alone.

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 'find tasks' with a long list of filter criteria (text search, project, section, parent, responsible user, labels, raw filter, saved filter). It is specific and covers the resource and action. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like find-completed-tasks or find-tasks-by-date, which slightly reduces clarity.

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 constraints such as 'At least one filter must be provided' and notes that certain parameters (filter, projectId, sectionId, parentId, filterIdOrName) cannot be used together. It does not, however, explain when to prefer this tool over alternatives (e.g., find-completed-tasks) or provide context about filtering completed tasks.

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