task_list

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds context about the task lifecycle and multi-agent coordination, but does not mention potential limitations like pagination or auth.

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 well-structured with a first sentence stating the main action, followed by context and an Args list. It is concise but could be slightly tighter.

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 list tool, the description provides adequate context: how to filter, relation to other task operations, and the coordination role. Output schema covers return values. Lacks pagination info, but likely acceptable.

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 has 0% description coverage; the description adds explicit allowed values for status ('open, claimed, completed, or failed') and clarifies that project filters by name, which compensates for the schema gap.

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' and resource 'tasks', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like task_create, task_claim, etc. It also provides a concrete example with status='open'.

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?

Explicitly states when to call (e.g., to find open work) and when not to ('Check for open tasks before creating new ones'), guiding the agent to avoid unnecessary creation.

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