search_tasks

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It comprehensively describes default behavior (status defaults to 'open'), allowed values for filters, return format (list of summaries with specified fields), and error condition (404 if project not found). Also notes that full content is excluded.

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 well-structured with bullet points for allowed values and clear sections. While slightly long, every sentence is informative and front-loaded with purpose. Could be slightly more concise but effective overall.

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?

Given 4 parameters, output schema exists, and description covers return format, error handling, and usage rules, it is completely adequate for an AI agent to understand and use the 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%, baseline 3. Description adds meaning by listing allowed values for status, priority, and type (though type schema lacks enum), explaining default status and that all parameters except project are optional. This adds value beyond the schema.

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 it queries the task backlog with optional filters and returns summaries ranked by creation order. It distinguishes itself from get_task_details by explicitly advising against calling that tool on every result.

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 states when to use: for status checks and task selection, then call get_task_details on the single selected task. Also explains default status behavior and how to retrieve all statuses, providing clear guidance.

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