Get Task Summary

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

Discloses that response includes a 'render field with tiered rendering guidance', indicating non-trivial response structure. No explicit statement about side effects or read-only nature. Since no annotations are provided, the description could be more transparent about safety (e.g., read-only hint), but it is not misleading.

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?

Four sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: purpose definition, content listing, usage scenario, response handling. No filler or repetition. Front-loaded with key intent.

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 no output schema, the description adequately explains the summary content (sections) and the presence of a render field with usage guidance. Covers the tool's role as an orientation tool. Could mention data freshness or limitations, but is comprehensive enough for a summary tool.

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 describes all 3 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The tool description does not add additional information about parameter meaning or usage beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline without adding extra value.

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?

Description clearly states it returns a 'Dashboard-style summary of the task queue' with specific breakdowns (overdue, due today, upcoming, counts by status/assignee, AI tasks). Distinguishes from task listing tools like list_tasks by being a summary, and from get_task by covering multiple aspects. Explicitly mentions call at session start, reinforcing purpose.

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?

Provides explicit usage: 'Call at session start to orient on what needs attention.' Also instructs to check render field before composing reply. Does not mention when not to use or alternatives, but the clear recommendation suffices for typical scenarios.

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