tasks_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral details such as default sorting, surfacing overdue tasks, and the requirement to include clickable dashboard URLs, which go beyond annotations.

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 informative but slightly lengthy. However, critical usage instructions are front-loaded in bold, and the rest is structured logically. A minor improvement would be to trim redundant phrasing, but it remains clear and effective.

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 no output schema, the description covers key behaviors: default view, sorting, status filtering, and the critical requirement to include dashboard links and surface overdue tasks. It provides sufficient context for an agent to use the tool 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds extra meaning by explaining default for status (pending) and that overdue tasks should be surfaced. It also highlights the dashboard URL, though not a parameter, it informs output handling.

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 tool lists tasks, with specific verb 'call' and resource 'tasks'. It distinguishes from sibling task tools (like tasks_create) by focusing on listing. It also specifies default behavior (pending, sorted by due date, urgent first) and optional filters.

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?

Explicitly instructs when to call: 'at start of any conversation about work, planning, or status — and any time the user asks about pending/open/in-progress tasks.' It also explains how to use status parameter and emphasizes including dashboard links.

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