tasks_list_tasklists

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'all' task lists, implying an unfiltered read operation, but does not explicitly disclose read-only behavior, potential empty results, or any side effects. For a trivial listing, it is minimally sufficient but lacks depth.

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 concise sentence with no redundant filler. Every word earns its place, making it optimally sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 zero-parameter complexity and the presence of an output schema, the description fully covers the operation. It states what the tool does and the scope ('all'), leaving no additional behavior unexplained. No return-value details are needed because the output schema handles that.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description adds no parameter-specific details because none exist; the schema already conveys everything (empty properties).

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('Google Tasks task lists'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like tasks_list (which lists tasks within a list) and tasks_create_tasklist (which creates a list). The scope 'all' adds precision, leaving no ambiguity about what is returned.

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. There is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or reference to sibling tools like tasks_list, making it unclear if the user needs the list of lists or the tasks within a specific list.

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