Search tasks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does usefully reveal that search indexing is eventually consistent and may lag writes by 10-60 seconds, which is a significant behavioral trait. However, it omits other potentially relevant behaviors such as pagination, result ordering, or search scope limitations.

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?

Two short sentences with no redundant content. The first sentence states the purpose, and the second adds a critical operational caveat. The description is compact and front-loaded.

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 a 10-parameter search tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description provides only the basic purpose and a key timing caveat. It lacks usage guidance, return-value descriptions, and details on how to combine filters, making it adequate but not fully context-complete.

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 description provides no parameter-specific information; it relies entirely on the input schema, which covers 70% of parameters (7 of 10 have descriptions). While the schema does a decent job for most parameters, the description adds no extra meaning beyond this and leaves three parameters undocumented, though they are fairly self-explanatory.

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 opens with a clear action verb 'Search' and the resource 'tasks', scoped to 'an Asana workspace'. This differentiates it from get_task (retrieve a single task) and list_tasks (likely list all tasks), though it does not explicitly name these alternatives.

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 explicit guidance is given about when to use this tool versus sibling tools like list_tasks or get_task. The only contextual hint is the eventual-consistency caveat, which implies caution after writes, but there is no statement of the intended use case or exclusions.

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