List Task Lists

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the 'for the user' scoping, which is useful context. It does not disclose whether shared/delegated lists are included or how the 1000-item cap affects results, but with rich annotations the bar is lower and there is no contradiction.

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 8-word sentence with zero filler, and the key scope ('all', 'for the user') is front-loaded. It is efficient, though it borders on under-specification since it carries no usage or differentiation context.

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 simple read-only list tool, the schema covers parameters, annotations cover safety, and an output schema exists. The clear gap is routing: nothing tells the agent to prefer this over get_task_list or list_tasks, nor clarifies whether the result includes only the user's own lists. Adequate but not complete.

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 100%, with all three parameters (page_token, max_results, user_google_email) already documented including defaults and the 1000 maximum. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb (List), resource (task lists), and scope (all, for the user), so it is not a tautology. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling get_task_list, leaving the agent to infer the single-vs-collection distinction.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus close siblings such as get_task_list, manage_task_list, or list_tasks. No alternatives, exclusions, or selection conditions are mentioned, so the agent must infer usage context from the tool name alone.

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