list-project-tasks

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

No annotations are present, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, pagination behavior, sorting, or performance implications. The description merely states 'list' without additional context.

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 13 words, concise and front-loaded with the main action. However, it could be slightly more structured or informative without becoming verbose.

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 8 optional parameters including pagination and field selection, the description lacks details on pagination, default behavior, response format, or any constraints. It is incomplete 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?

All 8 parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage), so the description adds minimal extra value beyond listing the filter types. The baseline is 3, and the description does not provide examples or clarify parameter interactions.

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 clearly states the tool lists project tasks with optional filtering by project, phase, or status. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like 'get-project-tasks-by-project' or 'get-project-tasks-by-phase', which are more specific.

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. The description only implies usage for listing tasks with filters, but does not mention when not to use it or suggest other tools for specific filtering needs.

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