get_statetree_global_tasks

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

With no annotations present, the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It only briefly describes parameters and states it retrieves tasks and their properties. There is no mention of side effects, permissions, rate limits, or response behavior, leaving significant ambiguity.

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 extremely concise: a one-sentence purpose followed by a clear parameter list. Every sentence is useful and there is no 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?

Given that an output schema exists, the description does not need to detail return values. However, it lacks context about the scope (e.g., all tasks from the asset) or any limitations. Still, it is sufficient for a straightforward retrieval operation.

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 the description compensates by explaining both parameters: asset_path as 'Content path to the StateTree asset' and filter as 'Optional substring filter on task class name'. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema, though examples or format hints would improve it.

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 states 'Get all global tasks with their properties,' which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes well from sibling tools like 'add_statetree_global_task' and 'get_statetree_states'.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or scenarios where another tool would be more appropriate.

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