get_executable_tasks

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

With no annotations available, the description discloses key behavioral traits: it returns only PENDING or IN_PROGRESS tasks and sorts them by priority. This goes beyond the schema, but it doesn't explicitly state read-only behavior or other side effects, so a 4 is appropriate.

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 efficiently structured with a clear summary, usage note, and parameter breakdown. Every sentence adds value and there is no redundancy.

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 tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the key aspects: what it returns, filtering options, and usage intent. It doesn't need to detail the output format since an output schema is available.

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 0%, and the description fully compensates by explaining both parameters: 'tags: Filter by tags (e.g., ['coding', 'ai-executable'])' and 'limit: Maximum number of tasks to return'. This adds meaning the schema lacks and includes an example for tags.

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 'Get tasks that AI can potentially execute' and specifies 'Returns PENDING or IN_PROGRESS tasks sorted by priority', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_tasks. This is a specific verb+resource with clear scope.

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 says 'Use this to find tasks to work on', providing a clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it stops short of a 5.

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