get_team_tasks

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 says 'Get tasks... with filters' and does not mention pagination behavior, default filters, result size limits, or whether subtasks are included by default. This is a significant gap for a tool with 13 parameters.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the core action, scope, and feature. There is no wasted language.

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?

This is a complex tool with 13 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema. The description only offers the basic purpose and does not explain important behavioral aspects like pagination, how filters interact, or the shape of the response. It is inadequate for an agent to use this tool confidently without further inference.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameter semantics are fully handled by the input schema. The description's mention of 'filters' is generic and adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, meriting the baseline score.

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 action ('Get tasks'), the resource ('across a whole ClickUp team/workspace'), and the filtering capability. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_tasks which likely operate at a narrower 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 phrase 'across a whole ClickUp team/workspace' provides clear context for when to use this tool, implying it is intended for workspace-wide queries rather than single-list or folder queries. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it stops short of full exclusion guidance.

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