get-project-task-dependencies

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get dependency information', but does not disclose if the operation is read-only, what data is returned, or any side effects. The description is insufficient for understanding tool behavior.

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 a single sentence of 5 words, which is concise. However, it lacks structure and does not provide any hierarchical information or key details. It is appropriately short but under-specified.

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 tool has two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return format, pagination, error handling, or when to use the optional parameter. More context is needed for effective use.

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema. Per the guidelines, baseline is 3 when coverage is high, and the description does not enhance parameter semantics.

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 'Get dependency information for project tasks' is clear about the verb and resource, but it is generic and does not distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'get-project-task' or 'list-project-tasks'. No specific details on what kind of dependency information (e.g., predecessors, successors) are provided, resulting in a score of 3.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus other task-related tools. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or alternative tools. This lack of context makes it harder for an agent to decide correctly.

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