discover_tasks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'query', implying a read operation, but does not state whether it is read-only, describe pagination behavior, or explain the meaning of the various after/filter/first/order groups. The example variables hint at structure but do not disclose side effects, auth requirements, or output format.

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 long, unstructured dump of variable names and an example JSON, most of which repeats schema property names. It is not concise and the example is cut off mid-sentence. The front-loaded label 'Discover Tasks · query discoverTasks' is unhelpful, and the rest does not earn its space with meaningful explanation.

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?

This is a complex GraphQL tool with 13 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description fails to explain the meaning of after/filter/first/order groups, the relationship between the three sets of variables, return values, or expected use cases. It is far from complete for effective tool selection and invocation.

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 coverage is 100% (each parameter is documented with a type name like 'GraphQL: String'), so the baseline is 3. The description lists all variable names and provides a partial example that shows filter and order shapes, which adds some value beyond the schema's bare type references. However, the example is truncated and does not explain the semantics of each parameter group, so it only marginally compensates.

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 only states 'Discover Tasks · query discoverTasks', which essentially restates the tool name and identifies it as a GraphQL query. It does not explain what the tool does, what tasks are discovered, or what it returns. Compared to siblings like 'discover_task', the plural form hints at listing, but the purpose is not explicitly stated.

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 like discover_task, assign_discover_task, or close_discover_task. The description does not mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or recommended scenarios.

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