list_open_tasks

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses scope (current workspace and branch) and optional filtering but does not mention return format, pagination, or potential behavior like sorting or limits. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 concise sentences with no redundant words. It front-loads the action and scope efficiently.

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 no output schema and a listing tool, the description fails to explain what is returned (e.g., list of task objects, their fields). It also omits details like ordering or pagination, leaving the agent underinformed about the tool's full behavior.

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?

The single parameter filePath is documented in the schema with a clear description. The description adds 'Optionally filter by file path,' which aligns with the schema. Since schema coverage is 100%, the description adds minimal new value, meeting the baseline.

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 the tool lists all open Fix My Comments tasks for the current workspace and branch, with optional file path filtering. It is a specific verb-resource combination and is distinct from sibling tools like get_task_thread and set_task_status.

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 implicitly indicates when to use the tool (when listing open tasks) but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or what alternatives might be more appropriate. The context is clear but lacks exclusionary criteria.

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