list_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 indicates a read-only GET operation but does not mention whether all tasks are returned, pagination behavior, sorting defaults, or any rate limits. The behavioral traits are severely under-specified.

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, front-loaded sentence: 'Get a list of tasks. (GET /tasks)'. It is free of fluff and the HTTP endpoint is a useful supplementary detail. Every word earns its place.

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?

This tool has 10 optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description fails to mention response structure, pagination, or how to combine filters. For a list endpoint with this many options, the description is too sparse to be fully self-sufficient.

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 input schema covers 100% of the parameters with detailed descriptions for all 10 properties, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The tool description itself adds no parameter information, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate given the high schema coverage.

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 'Get a list of tasks' clearly states the verb and resource, making the core purpose obvious. It does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like get_task, create_task, or update_task, but the plural 'list' provides implicit differentiation.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of filtering use cases, pagination, or contrast with get_task for a single task. The agent is left to infer appropriate usage from the schema alone.

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