tasks_list_toolList household tasks and to-do items, showing only incomplete tasks by default, with option to include completed ones.
List tasks (to-do items separate from chores).
By default shows only incomplete tasks.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| show_done | No | If true, also include completed tasks. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It explicitly states the default behavior of showing only incomplete tasks, which is meaningful behavioral context. As a read-only list tool, no side effects are implied or claimed, though side-effect/reversibility caveats are absent.
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 two short, front-loaded sentences. It states the purpose first and the key default behavior second, with no repetition or filler. It is appropriately concise for a tool with one optional parameter.
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 one-parameter list tool with an output schema available, the description covers the essential context: what is listed and the default filter. It does not mention how to include completed tasks, but that is fully documented in the input schema, so the lack of redundancy is 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?
The schema already fully documents the single show_done parameter with 100% coverage, including default false. The description's 'By default shows only incomplete tasks' restates that semantics in natural language rather than adding new parameter-level meaning.
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 clearly states the tool lists tasks and explicitly scopes tasks as to-do items separate from chores, which helps distinguish it from sibling tools like chores_list_tool. It does not name sibling alternatives, but the semantic distinction is clear and sufficient.
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 parenthetical 'separate from chores' and the default incomplete-task behavior imply when the tool should be used: for to-do items, not chores. However, there is no explicit when-not-to-use or comparison with alternatives such as chores_list_tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.