list_tasks

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does well: it discloses ordering, that results are metadata only, and that each task carries blocked_by, blocked, and blockers, including the meaning of blocked. It does not mention pagination or permissions, but the core behavior is transparent.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and ordering rule. Each sentence adds distinct value: usage, alternative tool, and returned blocking fields.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema, the description supplies the ordering semantics, metadata-only scope, alternative tool for details, and the key blocking-related return fields. Combined with the fully documented input schema, an agent has enough context to call it 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 description coverage is 100%, so all six filter parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no filter-specific meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable given the high coverage 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 states a specific verb and resource ('List tasks') and immediately clarifies the ordering ('queue order: the top of the queue first'). It explicitly distinguishes this metadata-only listing from the sibling tool get_task, which provides the brief and worklog.

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?

It gives clear operational guidance ('take work from the start of the list') and routes the agent to get_task when full details are needed. It does not explicitly discuss when to use each filter or when not to use the tool, but the primary usage context and alternative are clear.

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