list_my_tasks

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

The annotations already provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the scope (current user) and does not disclose details like pagination or rate limits. Since there is no contradiction with annotations, a baseline score is appropriate.

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 sentence, directly front-loaded with the action and scope. It contains no redundant words and earns its place without any filler.

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?

This is a simple list operation with one optional parameter, read-only annotations, and no output schema. The description sufficiently conveys the tool's purpose and scope; no additional detail is needed for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 has 100% coverage with a clear description for the 'limit' parameter (max tasks, default 10). The tool description does not add any extra parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score 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 clearly states the action ('List tasks') and the scope ('assigned to the currently configured user'), making it easy to distinguish from sibling tools like list_hr_tasks or get_task. It uses a specific verb and resource, fully clarifying what the tool does.

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 for retrieving the current user's task list, but it does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or compare with related tools. This is an implied usage rather than explicit guidance.

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