list_tasks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It states the tool returns a list of tasks with fields like task_id, owner, etc., but does not disclose behavior on missing DAG, errors, or side effects. Adequate but not thorough.

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 well-structured with a clear opening, bullet-pointed examples, and return fields. It is slightly verbose but every sentence contributes value. Front-loaded with purpose.

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 interface (one required parameter, list return), the description covers purpose, parameter, and return fields. There is an output schema, so return details need not be expanded. Minor missing error contexts but sufficient overall.

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 only parameter dag_id is described as 'The ID of the DAG to list tasks for', adding meaning beyond the schema's type and required flag. With 0% schema description coverage, this explanation is valuable.

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 'Get all tasks defined in a specific DAG' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_task (single task) and explore_dag (different 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?

Provides explicit query examples such as 'What tasks are in DAG X?' and 'Show me the tasks in this workflow'. It does not explicitly state when not to use the tool, but the context is clear for its intended use.

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