list_my_tasks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It reveals the internal search query and the effect of app mode. It does not mention side effects, and the operation is inherently read-only. The description is honest and adds useful context beyond the input schema.

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 just two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence provides essential information without redundancy or fluff. The key functionality is stated first, followed by necessary details.

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 no output schema, the description could mention the format of returned tasks. However, it covers the critical context (authentication scope, project resolution, search query, app mode). The tool is simple (list of tasks), so this is nearly complete. Missing return structure is minor.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that project_id can be obtained from .kanboard.yaml configuration, and that provided values override the config. This context helps the agent understand parameter precedence and optionality.

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 open tasks for the authenticated user in a project. It uses specific verbs ('List') and resources ('open tasks assigned to the currently authenticated user'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_tasks (which likely lists all tasks) and list_overdue_tasks.

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?

It explains the requirement for a project_id (explicit or from config) and the search query used. It also notes behavior differences in app mode. While it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives, the purpose makes usage clear. The phrase 'assigned to the currently authenticated user' implies when to use it.

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