pve_get_cluster_tasks

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure, but it does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation, mention ordering or pagination of the task list, or describe any limits. It only indicates the content (history of certain operations), so most behavioral characteristics are undisclosed.

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 that immediately conveys the tool's focus and uses examples to clarify what counts as a cluster task. There is no filler or redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple (one optional parameter) and an output schema exists, so the description does not need to explain return values. However, it lacks explicit read-only confirmation and usage guidance, making it only minimally complete for an agent selecting this tool without annotations.

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 has a single 'limit' parameter with 0% schema description coverage, and the description does not mention or explain this parameter. While the parameter name and default value make its purpose fairly obvious, the description adds no information beyond the schema and fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 identifies the tool's scope as cluster task history and lists example operation types (migrations, backups, clones, snapshots), which distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on nodes, VMs, storage, etc. However, it uses a noun phrase rather than an explicit verb like 'list' or 'retrieve', so it is slightly less direct.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any conditions or exclusions. The description only states what the history contains, leaving the agent to infer usage context from the tool name and sibling tools.

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