list_tasks

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral aspects itself. It implies a read-only listing, but doesn't explicitly state that it's non-destructive, nor does it mention ordering, pagination, default behavior, or any side effects. The lack of detail around 'recent' and how filtering works leaves the agent guessing about the actual behavior.

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 concise sentence with no fluff. It communicates the core purpose efficiently. However, it might be too brief to be helpful, but conciseness itself is good—there are no redundant phrases or unnecessary details.

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 the lack of annotations and schema descriptions, the description carries the full burden of contextual completeness. It omits crucial information like sorting order, pagination, valid state values, and any limits or constraints. For a listing tool with optional parameters and no documented output schema details visible, this is insufficient for an agent to confidently decide when to call this tool and how to fill parameters correctly.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must clarify parameter meaning. It explains that 'state' filters the results, but provides no guidance on valid state values or how 'limit' behaves (e.g., maximum, default is 100 from schema). The description fails to cover the 'limit' parameter entirely, making it inadequate for understanding parameter semantics.

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 verb 'list' and the resource 'tasks', differentiating it from singular operations like 'get_task'. It also mentions an optional state filter, which adds some specificity. However, the term 'recent' is vague and could refer to different ordering criteria (creation time, last update), and there's no mention of sorting or pagination, so clarity is good but not perfect.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_task' or 'submit_task'. The description simply states what it does without indicating contexts, prerequisites, or when not to use it. Given the sibling tools, an agent would need to infer usage, which is insufficient.

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