get_list_tasks

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

Annotations already signal readOnlyHint=true, so the description builds on that by disclosing default behaviors for include_closed and subtasks. The note that subtasks default inverted relative to search_tasks is a valuable behavioral nuance beyond annotations.

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 tight: one introductory sentence followed by bullet-point argument explanations. Every line carried actionable information without redundancy or filler.

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?

It covers parameter semantics and tool relationships well, including a note about search_tasks' default. However, it omits details like pagination or sorting behavior, though an output schema exists and may cover return 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter's purpose, provided examples for status, and highlighting the discovery path for list_id. It adds meaning the schema entirely lacks.

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 specifies 'Get all tasks in a specific list' with concrete list type examples (backlog, epic, tech debt). This clearly distinguishes it from broader search tools like search_tasks and gives a precise verb+resource scope.

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 implies use for list-scoped queries and cross-references get_workspace_hierarchy for list ID discovery, but it never explicitly states when to prefer this tool over alternatives like search_tasks or get_sprint_tasks. No exclusion criteria are provided.

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