list_tasks

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is already covered. The description adds behavioral context: it returns status/type/trigger/results, supports narrowing via filters, and limit controls the count. It doesn't cover response format or pagination, but given the annotation coverage, this is a minor gap.

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?

Three compact sentences with the purpose first, followed by use case, usage note, and sibling routing. No redundant words.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description names the returned fields and provides the primary use case plus explicit alternatives. The optional filters are all documented in the schema, and the readOnly annotation covers side effects. An agent has enough to select and invoke this 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and each parameter has a description. The tool description only adds generic guidance to 'use the filters' and that `limit` sets the count, which is already in the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 names the verb 'List', the resource 'background tasks', and enumerates the fields returned (status, type, trigger source, results). It also explicitly differentiates itself from list_active_tasks and the task summary tools, so an agent can distinguish it from siblings.

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?

Explicitly frames when to use it ('monitoring document consumption and other async operations') and gives direct routing: use list_active_tasks for pending/running tasks and get_task_status_counts/get_task_summary for totals. This is clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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