get_waiting_tasks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions returning a list with 'bulk operation guidance' but does not state if the operation is read-only, has side effects, or requires special permissions. The description is too vague on behavioral traits.

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?

Description is concise (three lines) with structured Args and Returns sections, front-loading the purpose. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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?

Output schema exists, so return structure is covered elsewhere. The description covers the essential purpose, parameter, and return intent. It lacks details on pagination or limits, but given the tool's simplicity, it is largely complete.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description includes 'Args: project_id: ID of the project', which adds semantic meaning beyond the schema's title of 'Project Id'. For a single integer parameter, this is adequate but not enriched.

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?

Description clearly states verb ('Get'), resource ('tasks in waiting state'), and purpose ('for bulk operations'). Among siblings like filter_tasks and list_tasks, this specificity helps distinguish it.

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 phrase 'for bulk operations' implies usage context, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like filter_tasks or list_tasks, nor when not to use it.

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