list_node_tasks

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'List recent tasks' and parameter meanings. It does not mention that the operation is read-only, safe, or what defines 'recent' (time frame). It does not address pagination behavior beyond limit/start offsets. No contradictions.

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 concise, front-loaded with the purpose, and uses a clear bullet-list format for parameters. No redundant sentences. However, the parameter descriptions could be more structured (e.g., using a table), but it is not overly verbose.

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 6 parameters and an existing output schema, the description covers all parameters adequately. However, it lacks context about what 'recent' means, the nature of tasks (e.g., from node task log), and how the time range is determined. It is minimally complete but has gaps.

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 compensates by explaining each parameter (e.g., 'node: The node name', 'limit: Max tasks to return', 'typefilter: Filter by task type (e.g. qmstart)' ). It adds value beyond schema types and defaults, though it could provide allowed values or constraints for filters.

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 'List recent tasks on a node' clearly states the verb (list) and resource (tasks on a node). It differentiates from sibling tools like get_cluster_tasks (cluster-level) and get_task_log (specific task details) by focusing on node-level listing, but does not explicitly compare them.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_cluster_tasks or get_task_log). It does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions. The parameter descriptions hint at usage but lack explicit when/when-not advice.

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