backlog

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It successfully adds behavioral context beyond the name: specifies return format (plain number), performance characteristic (more efficient than task_list), and filter compatibility (same syntax as task_list). Minor gap: doesn't mention behavior on zero matches or invalid filter syntax.

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?

Three sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: (1) core function, (2) comparison/rationale, (3) parameter syntax reference. No redundant words, logically ordered from primary action to secondary details.

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?

For a single-parameter read operation with full schema documentation, the description is complete. It compensates for the missing output schema by describing the return value explicitly. The efficiency comparison is crucial contextual information given the sibling tool ecosystem.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with detailed examples in the schema description. The tool description adds valuable cross-reference context ('Uses the same filter syntax as task_list') that helps agents understand parameter reuse across tools, earning a score above the baseline 3.

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?

Description clearly states the specific action (Return the count), resource (tasks), output format (plain number), and scoping (matching a filter). It effectively distinguishes from task_list by contrasting data retrieval vs. count retrieval.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'when you only need the count, not the task data.' Names the specific alternative (task_list) and provides the decision criterion (efficiency). This is exemplary guidance for sibling tool selection.

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