List Tasks

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the status value encoding and the ID-discovery purpose, but says nothing about pagination behavior, default sort, result caps, or whether the operation is purely read-only. Adequate but with real gaps for an 8-parameter listing tool.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and no filler. Some content (status legend, filter list) duplicates the schema, which slightly dilutes the value-per-sentence ratio.

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?

For an 8-param list tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers filters and the ID-lookup purpose but omits return shape and pagination semantics that an agent needs to page correctly. Sufficient to invoke, thin for correct integration.

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 all eight parameters are already documented, and the description's status legend merely repeats the schema's own '1=open, 2=closed' text. Worse, it advertises filtering by 'board' even though no board parameter exists in the schema, which could send an agent looking for a nonexistent argument.

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?

Starts with a specific verb+resource ('List and filter tasks') and enumerates the filter dimensions, so the agent immediately knows this is a search/list operation rather than a fetch-by-ID. It does not explicitly name productive_get_task as the alternative, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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 closing sentence gives a concrete reason to pick this tool ('Use this to find task IDs and task_list IDs'), which is a clear usage context absent from many list tools. There are no explicit exclusions or when-not-to-use conditions, so it does not reach a 5.

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