get_cluster_tasks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only says 'recent tasks' without defining 'recent', and does not mention ordering, pagination, or rate limits. The read-only nature is implied but not explicit.

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 very short (one sentence plus an Args line), which is concise but lacks formal structure. It uses markdown-like formatting for Args but does not separate purpose from usage. It could benefit from a brief note on scope or typical use.

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 complexity of cluster management and many sibling tools (get_cluster_log, list_node_tasks), the description is incomplete. It does not mention return format, pagination, or how to interpret results. The output schema is present but not explained, and the description offers no additional context.

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 the description must compensate. The description only includes 'limit: Maximum number of tasks to return', which restates the parameter name without adding significant context like the default value (50) or allowed range. The parameter is not explained beyond its obvious meaning.

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 'List recent tasks across all nodes in the cluster', specifying the verb 'list', the resource 'tasks', and the scope 'across all nodes'. This distinguishes it from node-level counterparts like list_node_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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_node_tasks or get_task_status. The description does not mention any prerequisites or context for choosing this tool.

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