pve_list_tasks

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

Annotations already establish this as a safe, non-open-world read, so the safety bar is covered. The description adds almost nothing beyond them: 'recent' is undefined (what window? is there one?), and there is no mention of default limit, ordering, or whether results are truncated. For a task-listing tool where recency and pagination behavior are the core semantics, that is a real gap.

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?

A single compact sentence with no filler, and scope is front-loaded before the filter qualifier. It is efficient, though its brevity contributes to the semantic gaps elsewhere.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, but the description omits the recency window and limit behavior that determine what actually comes back. For a listing tool with zero schema parameter documentation, the definition leaves an agent guessing about result scope.

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 all three parameters (node, vmid, limit) rely entirely on their bare names. The description hints that 'guest' maps to vmid and mentions node, which is a small compensation, but the default limit of 20 and the meaning of node scoping are never explained.

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?

Specific verb (List) plus resource (cluster/node tasks) and a scoping qualifier ('recent', 'optionally filtered by guest'). It implicitly contrasts with pve_task_status for a single task, but never names the sibling explicitly, so a reader still has to infer the boundary.

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?

'Optionally filtered by guest' implies when the vmid filter applies, but there is no guidance on when to choose this over pve_task_status or pve_wait_task, and no stated conditions or exclusions. Usage is implied rather than directed.

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