tasks_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral information. It doesn't disclose whether this is a read-only operation, what permissions might be required, if there are rate limits, pagination behavior, or what the response format looks like. The mention of 'optional filtering' hints at some functionality but lacks specifics.

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 extremely concise at just 6 words, with no wasted language. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and includes the key feature of filtering. Every word earns its place in this minimal description.

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?

For a tool with 5 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain the filtering options, return format, or behavioral characteristics needed for proper tool selection and invocation. The agent would struggle to use this tool effectively based on the description alone.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage for 5 parameters, the description doesn't compensate at all. It mentions 'optional filtering' but doesn't explain what parameters are available for filtering (limit, after, properties, associations, archived) or their purposes. The agent would have no semantic understanding of these parameters from the description alone.

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 'List all tasks with optional filtering' clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('tasks'), but it's vague about scope and doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'tasks_search' or 'tasks_get'. It specifies 'all tasks' but doesn't clarify if this includes archived tasks or other statuses.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'tasks_search' or 'tasks_get'. The description mentions 'optional filtering' but doesn't explain what types of filtering are available or when filtering might be preferred over other tools.

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