list_tasks_by_user

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read operation via 'List', but does not disclose pagination, ordering, permission requirements, or any side effects. This is a significant gap for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

A single, well-structured sentence that is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words. Every part earns its place.

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 2-param tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers the core purpose and parameters but omits return format, pagination, sorting, and any distinction from sibling tools like search_tasks. It's adequate but not complete for an agent needing full context.

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 description adds meaning to both parameters: user_id is the assignee, and status_filter is an optional filter. Since schema coverage is 0%, this is valuable. However, it doesn't specify allowed status values or formats, but that may be acceptable given the generic nature.

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' with a clear resource ('tasks') and scope ('assigned to a specific user'), plus an optional filter. It distinguishes from siblings like get_task_details (single task) and get_overdue_tasks (overdue-only).

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?

It clearly implies when to use the tool: when you need all tasks assigned to a specific user, optionally filtered by status. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling alternatives like search_tasks or get_overdue_tasks, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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