list_tasks

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes what the tool does (lists tasks) but does not explicitly state whether it is read-only, whether permissions are required, or any side effects. It also does not clarify whether the result is filtered by the 'estado' parameter or if 'tiempo registrado' is always included. This is minimal disclosure for a list operation.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the main action and resource. There is no wasted wording; it communicates the essential purpose and output details efficiently.

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?

As a simple list tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the 'term' parameter, whether 'estado' is a filter, or the return format. It also lacks information on pagination, default behavior, or any errors. The absence of parameter documentation substantially limits the agent's ability to invoke the tool correctly.

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 has zero description coverage, so the description must compensate for parameters. It mentions the status values (todo, in_progress, done) which aligns with the 'estado' enum, but it does not explain that 'estado' is a filter, nor does it mention the 'term' parameter at all. The description adds minimal semantic value for parameters.

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 tool lists tasks from the configured project, including their status and registered time. The verb 'list' is specific to the action, and the resource is well-defined. It is distinct from sibling tools like create_task, start_task, and mark_task_done, which perform different operations.

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 implies usage when one needs to list tasks, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. It offers only the basic purpose without contextual decision-making support.

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