list_tasks

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

There are no annotations, and the description only states 'List tasks' without disclosing behavior such as pagination defaults, ordering, permissions, or whether results are scoped by portal/project. It adds minimal value beyond the tool's name.

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?

One short sentence front-loaded with the main action, no filler words. Appropriate length and structure for a simple list operation.

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 simple listing nature, the description is adequate but sparse. It lacks any mention of return format or additional filters beyond what the schema provides, and with no output schema, the agent must infer the response structure.

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 provides 100% parameter coverage (page, per_page, project_id), and the description offers no additional parameter context. The phrase 'from a project or portal' hints at project_id's optionality but the schema already states that.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'tasks' and clearly states scope ('from a project or portal'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_issues and list_projects.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search or get_task_by_prefix. It only states what it does, without clarifying exclusions or preferred use cases.

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