list_tasks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It adds valuable transparency by explaining that filter and sort_by are applied server-side, that filtering happens before pagination, and that results are complete at any page size. This goes beyond what the schema alone would convey.

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 compact and front-loaded: the one-line purpose comes first, followed by the essential behavioral details and a concrete example. Every sentence earns its place, and there is no redundant 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?

The description covers the key runtime semantics needed to use the tool correctly: server-side filtering, sorting, pagination ordering, and result completeness. An output schema exists, so return-value details are not required. The main gap is lack of explicit guidance on selecting this tool over sibling listing/search tools.

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 must compensate. It does so for the two non-obvious parameters, filter and sort_by, with a concrete Vikunja filter/sort example. The remaining parameters (project_id, page, per_page) are self-explanatory from their names and schema defaults, so the coverage is adequate.

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 clear action and resource: 'List tasks in a project.' It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like search_tasks or list_bucket_tasks, but the scope is specific enough that an agent can infer its core purpose without opening the schema.

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 when to use the tool by focusing on project-level task listing and gives concrete examples for filter and sort_by. However, it never explicitly says when to prefer this over search_tasks or list_bucket_tasks, and it does not provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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