keap_list_tasks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only lists parameters and the HTTP method; it does not state whether this is a read-only operation, what the default scope is (e.g., all account tasks vs. user-specific), or any pagination behavior beyond the parameter names.

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 efficient: a short statement, an API line, and a structured Args list. Every line earns its place with no fluff or repetition. The numeric/boolean filters are each described in a single concise phrase.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values don't need explanation. The description covers filter parameters and pagination inputs, but misses broader context: whether the tool lists all tasks in the account or only those visible to the authenticated user, how filters combine, and default sort behavior. It is minimally viable but has clear 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 documenting all 7 parameters with one-line explanations (e.g., 'contact_id: Filter by related contact ID'). This adds meaning beyond the schema. However, 'order: Sort field' is vague regarding accepted values and syntax, and 'completed' doesn't mention boolean type, so not perfect.

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 tasks' – a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like keap_create_task (create) and keap_list_contacts (different resource). Including 'API: GET /tasks' reinforces the exact operation.

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 verb 'List tasks' implies usage when needing to retrieve task data. However, it offers no explicit guidance on when to use this vs. alternatives like keap_list_notes or keap_list_contacts, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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