list_tasks

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions default limit and reason but does not disclose whether this is a read-only operation, auth requirements, rate limits, or other behavioral traits beyond the basic listing behavior.

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 efficiently uses Args/Returns structure and front-loads key behavior (default limit). Every sentence adds value, though could be slightly more compact.

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?

Covers parameters and return, but does not mention pagination, ordering, or output structure beyond 'list of tasks'. Output schema exists but is not referenced. Adequate but not fully comprehensive given 4 parameters and sibling tools.

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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage; description adds meaning for all parameters: explains project_id, limit (default 5), status (optional filter), tags (optional list). Provides defaults and types, compensating for schema gaps.

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 'List tasks for a project' with a specific default limit of 5 and reason (avoid overloading context windows). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'filter_tasks' by focusing on listing with defaults.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., 'filter_tasks' or 'get_task'). Does not mention when not to use it or provide comparisons. Only gives default limit rationale.

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