List tasks

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds what they cannot say: no pagination, no guaranteed order, an empty list means no matches, and 'content' holds the prompt and any partial result. That is behavior an agent needs and cannot get from structured fields.

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?

Scope and filter come first, then return shape, then sibling routing. Every sentence carries distinct information and nothing is repeated from the schema verbatim.

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?

With no output schema available, the description supplies the response shape inline (count, tasks with id/title/tags/content/createdAt) and clarifies that 'id' is the key brain_tasks_update expects, leaving no call-shaping ambiguity.

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, but the description adds real meaning by explaining what the 'pending' and 'blocked' enum values imply for the caller's workflow rather than just restating the enum.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the tasks in the shared queue') plus an optional filter, and explicitly separates itself from brain_tasks_submit and brain_tasks_update by function.

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?

Gives concrete when-to-use guidance tied to filter values ('pending' to find work waiting for you, 'blocked' to see what is waiting on dependencies) and points to the sibling tools for adding tasks or changing state.

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