task.list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, and it delivers almost nothing beyond the word "outstanding." It does not state that this is a read-only operation, whether results are scoped to an active profile or session, how results are ordered or paginated, or what happens when a profile has no outstanding items.

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 short but under-specified rather than concise: the single fragment is not front-loaded with a verb and omits the essential scope of the result. Brevity here reflects missing content, not efficient editing.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description is the only source of information about what the agent gets back, yet it says nothing about the return shape, item fields, or filters. For a list-style tool this leaves the agent unable to anticipate or act on the result.

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 declares zero parameters and zero required inputs at 100% coverage, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline 4 applies for a parameterless tool.

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 phrase "What is outstanding on a profile" is a fragment rather than a stated verb+resource; it never says the tool lists tasks or returns a list. An agent can partially infer intent from the sibling names (task.add, task.start, task.done, task.cancel), but the description itself does not distinguish this tool beyond a vague notion of pending items.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives such as run_list or profile.list, and no stated prerequisites (e.g., whether a profile must be started or a session active). The agent is left to guess the context entirely.

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