list_tasks

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

No annotations provided. Description discloses tool reads from a specific file and returns filtered tasks with count, which implies read-only behavior. However, it does not explicitly state it is read-only or discuss authorization, rate limits, or side effects.

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?

Single sentence conveys purpose, filters, and return value efficiently. Front-loaded with main action. Could be split for readability, but no wasted words.

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 5 parameters (1 required) and no output schema, description covers basic return (filtered tasks + count) but lacks details on task structure, pagination, error handling, or explanation of workspace_root. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 0% (no parameter descriptions). Description adds meaning for status (filters), agent, changed_files (glob match against task.scope), and limit. However, workspace_root is not explained. Description partially compensates for missing schema descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states 'List tasks from `.squad/tasks.json`' indicating verb and resource. It specifies optional filters and return value (filtered tasks + count). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_task_status or expand_task.

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?

Description mentions optional filters but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like update_task_status or expand_task. No when-not-to-use or alternative references.

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