search_tasks

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

The description adds ordering behavior ('Returns most recently updated first') and implies case-insensitive matching via 'ILIKE'. However, with no annotations, it fails to disclose other traits like pagination, result limits, or whether deleted tasks are included.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with no unnecessary words. Every part adds value: action, scope, and ordering.

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 a simple search tool with no output schema, the description provides the essential behavior but lacks details on return fields, empty results, and parameter semantics. It is minimally adequate but not thorough.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It only indirectly explains the 'query' parameter via 'ILIKE match' and ignores the 'limit' parameter entirely. No format for the query string is given.

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 'Search task titles by ILIKE match' clearly indicates the action (search), the resource (task titles), and the method (ILIKE matching). It distinguishes from sibling search tools like search_emails and search_notes by specifying 'task titles'.

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., listing tasks or other search tools). There is no mention of when not to use it or any prerequisites.

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