find-tasks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the description carries a lighter burden. It adds the behavioral constraint that at least one filter is required, which is useful context not present in the annotations. However, it does not describe pagination or result behavior beyond what the schema's cursor parameter implies, so it earns a middle score.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently lists the tool's capabilities and the key constraint. Every word contributes to understanding, with no fluff or repetition.

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?

With 12 parameters, an output schema, and rich annotations, the description covers the main filter categories and the mandatory filter condition. It does not detail pagination or result structures, but those are already handled by the schema and output schema. It is complete enough for the tool's purpose and complexity.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a high-level semantic grouping of the filter parameters and explicitly mentions 'filterIdOrName', and it introduces the 'at least one filter must be provided' rule that is not in the schema. This goes beyond the schema and justifies a 4.

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 by' and lists the many filter dimensions (text, project/section/parent, responsible user, labels, raw filter, saved filter). It is specific and unambiguous about what the tool does, but it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like find-tasks-by-date or find-completed-tasks, so it misses the top score.

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 only usage guidance is 'At least one filter must be provided,' which is a constraint but not guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when to prefer find-tasks-by-date for date-specific queries or find-completed-tasks for completed tasks, so guidance is minimal.

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