yougile_list_tasks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the read-only safety profile is covered. The description adds value by naming the specific /task-list endpoint and noting its broader filter support relative to /tasks, which gives the agent extra behavioral context beyond the annotations. It doesn't contradict annotations.

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?

Two sentences, no filler. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose, and the second delivers usage guidance and endpoint context. Every clause earns its place, and the structure is easy to scan.

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 six-parameter read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential points: purpose, filter usage, endpoint identity, and read-only nature. It doesn't describe the response format, but 'List tasks' strongly implies an array of task objects, and the schema covers all parameter handling. Given the annotations and schema richness, this is complete enough.

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?

All 6 parameters are documented in the schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful grouping and prioritization of filter parameters (columnId vs. assignedTo/stickerId/title), clarifying how they map to different use cases. This goes beyond parameter descriptions by suggesting which filters are primary and which are 'advanced.'

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 opens with 'List tasks with filters,' a specific verb+resource combination that clearly states the tool's function. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like yougile_get_task (single task) and yougile_create_task/update_task (mutations) by its list/filter scope, and further differentiates from a hypothetical /tasks endpoint by noting it uses /task-list which supports more filters.

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 concrete usage guidance on how to apply filters, distinguishing columnId for column-specific retrieval from assignedTo/stickerId/title for advanced filtering. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, but the endpoint comparison ('supports more filters than /tasks') implies a preferred use case for broader filtering scenarios.

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