tasks_discover

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false), the description adds a key behavioral trait: 'Operational tasks tools are hidden until discovered.' This discloses the discovery mechanism and the need to call this tool before others, which is valuable context. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 front-loaded with the primary action and usage directive, followed by a comprehensive list of operation names. While the list is long, it is directly relevant and structured. It avoids fluff and remains efficient overall.

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 simple discovery tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers the workflow: call this first, discover operations, then call the needed tool. It explains the hidden-tool behavior and optional filtering. The lack of return-format details is acceptable given the simplicity and absence of an output schema.

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 input schema fully describes the single optional 'query' parameter as a keyword filter, so schema coverage is 100%. The description's list of operation names gives context for what might be filtered but does not add new parameter semantics beyond the schema. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 'List the available tasks operations,' providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling discover tools by focusing on 'tasks' and listing the specific operations, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly instructs to 'call this first' before other tasks tools, establishing a clear when-to-use directive. It explains that operational tasks tools are hidden until discovered, which is important context. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives for other services, though the naming convention implies this is the tasks-specific discovery entry point.

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