List recent background tasks, newest first, to check their status and output.
List recent tasks, newest first.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "list_tasks"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description discloses only the ordering (newest first) but omits important behavioral details such as whether completed tasks are included, the meaning of 'recent' (time window), pagination, or any read-only scoping. With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility and only partially covers it.
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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no fluff. It conveys core purpose and ordering efficiently, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.
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 listing tool with one optional parameter and an output schema, the description is lacking contextual completeness. It does not clarify the scope of 'recent tasks' (e.g., user-specific, status, time range), which is critical for correct invocation. The output schema mitigates return-value ambiguity, but the missing behavioral context remains a gap.
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 only parameter 'limit' has a default of 20 in the schema, but the description does not explain its effect (e.g., maximum number of tasks returned). Since schema coverage is 0%, the description was expected to compensate but adds no meaning beyond the parameter name.
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 'List recent tasks, newest first' clearly identifies the action (list) and resource (tasks) with a specific ordering. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that manage individual tasks (start_task, task_status, task_result, cancel_task) rather than providing a list overview.
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 implies this tool is used to retrieve an overview of recent tasks, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, so the usage guidance is implied rather than explicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.