list_hr_tasks

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds that tasks are scoped to a parent HR case, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as ordering, pagination, or filter semantics beyond the schema's state parameter.

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, concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without redundant words.

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 the simple nature of the tool and the schema covering parameters, the description is adequate, but it leaves out any details on return structure or limits, which could be expected for a listing operation. No output schema exists.

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 input schema fully describes both parameters (hr_case_sysid and state) with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' and identifies the resource 'HR tasks' plus the scope 'associated with an HR case', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_hr_cases or get_hr_task.

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 implies usage context—listing tasks for a specific case—but does not explicitly mention when to use it over alternatives such as list_my_tasks or get_hr_case_activity. No exclusion guidance is provided.

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