list_tasks

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

With readOnlyHint=true, the safety profile is already covered. The description adds useful behavioral detail: it returns today/this week/overdue/completed counts, any task groups, and sorts by due date. This is beyond what the annotation declares.

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?

A single sentence captures scope, output composition, and sort order with no filler. It is front-loaded with the resource and follows with the distinguishing views.

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 read-only list tool, the description conveys what is returned (tasks, counts, groups, sorting) and scopes it to a workspace. Pagination and date-bucketing are left to the schema, which fully documents them, so nothing critical is missing.

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 covers all 5 parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The tool description mentions 'workspace' context and due-date sorting but doesn't add meaning beyond what the schema properties already state.

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 identifies the resource as vendor-assigned tasks within a workspace and references the portal's Tasks tab, making it distinct from sibling list tools. It doesn't state an explicit verb ('list'), but the resource and scope are 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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives among siblings. The context ('the portal's Tasks tab', vendor-assigned tasks) implies when it applies, but no exclusions or cross-references are provided.

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