get_tasks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys a read-oriented list operation and some filtering behavior, but it does not mention pagination, default limits, response shape, or any other operational traits. The 'etc.' also leaves important behavior unspecified.

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 with the main purpose front-loaded. It is not bloated, though the trailing 'etc.' adds vagueness without substance.

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 tool with six parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It omits the required client_slug context, pagination behavior, return format, and any guidance on how this relates to task management siblings like complete_task or update_task.

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 description coverage is 67%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds a concrete example (entity_type=leads) and paraphrases is_completed, but it adds no meaning for page, limit, or client_slug, and does not compensate for the undocumented pagination 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 a specific action ('Busca uma lista de tarefas') and a specific resource ('na Kommo CRM'), and it distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like create_task, update_task, and get_leads by focusing on listing tasks. The mention of filtering by lead and completion state adds further clarity about its scope.

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 through its verb 'Busca' and filter examples, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over related alternatives such as get_notes or create_task. It gives context about filtering by lead and completion status, but no exclusions or alternative routing.

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