ListTasks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. The description '获取任务列表' reveals nothing about whether this is a read-only operation, whether it requires authentication, what the return format looks like, pagination behavior, rate limits, or error conditions. For a tool with 13 parameters and no annotation coverage, this is completely inadequate.

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?

While extremely concise with just three Chinese characters, this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. The description fails to provide any meaningful information that would help an AI agent understand or use the tool correctly. Every sentence should earn its place, but this has no sentences to evaluate.

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 complexity (13 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is completely inadequate. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how results are structured, pagination behavior, or any behavioral traits. For a list tool with many filtering options, this minimal description leaves critical gaps in understanding.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all 13 parameters thoroughly with descriptions and examples (e.g., SortBy with format details, TaskType with enum-like values). The description adds zero parameter information beyond what's in the schema, meeting the baseline of 3 when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 '获取任务列表' (Get task list) is a tautology that restates the tool name 'ListTasks' in Chinese. It provides no additional specificity about what kind of tasks, what scope, or what distinguishes this from other list tools like ListTaskInstances or ListTaskOperationLogs. The purpose is minimally stated but lacks differentiation.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With sibling tools like GetTask (singular), ListTaskInstances, and ListTaskOperationLogs, there's no indication of when this list tool is appropriate versus those other task-related tools. No context or exclusions are provided.

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