search_tasks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions filtering criteria but does not disclose search scope (e.g., user-specific), pagination behavior, or what happens if no results match. This is adequate but lacks rich behavioral context.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and criteria, followed by a use case. Every sentence adds value without redundancy—highly concise.

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 search tool with 4 optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core functionality and usage context. It could mention return format (e.g., list of matching tasks) but is sufficiently complete for typical use.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description lists criteria (name, status, category, deadline) but does not add meaning beyond the schema's detailed property descriptions. It provides a summary but no extra semantics.

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 'Search and filter tasks by criteria', specifying the action (search/filter) and resource (tasks). It distinguishes from siblings like list_all_tasks (which lists all without filters) and search_shop_items (different resource), making its purpose 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?

The description says 'Useful for finding specific tasks or analyzing tasks by various dimensions', which indicates when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare with alternatives like list_all_tasks for unfiltered listings.

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