Get all subtasks of a parent task by providing its ID. Use this to inspect task breakdown and dependencies.
List subtasks of a parent task
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| parentTaskId | Yes | Parent task ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. It only states 'List subtasks' without explaining whether nested/direct subtasks are returned, how results are ordered, whether pagination applies, or any authorization implications.
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 a single concise sentence with no filler and front-loaded verb and resource. It loses points only because it omits contextual details that would make it more useful, though conciseness itself is strong.
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 one-parameter list operation, the description plus schema is minimally sufficient to call the tool correctly. However, without annotations or an output schema, it would benefit from clarifying whether subtasks are returned recursively and what the response contains, leaving some uncertainty.
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%, with parentTaskId described as 'Parent task ID'. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond that, so the baseline of 3 applies because the schema already handles parameter documentation.
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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List subtasks of a parent task'. It clearly identifies the operation and scope, distinguishing it from siblings like list_tasks, get_task, and create_subtask by focusing on the parent-child relationship.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when to choose list_subtasks over list_tasks or search, and it gives no exclusions or context about the parentTaskId requirement beyond the schema.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.