list_tasks

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description's 'list' verb is consistent with a read-only operation. However, the description adds no extra behavioral context such as auth requirements, pagination, or potential side effects. With annotations covering the safety profile, a neutral score is appropriate.

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 in Chinese that directly states the tool's purpose without waste. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized for a simple no-parameter list operation.

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 the tool's low complexity (no parameters, read-only, output schema present), the description is sufficient for an agent to understand the core function. However, it does not explain what 'task management' refers to, but this is likely clear from the context of the system and output schema. It is complete enough for a simple list tool.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is complete with an empty object. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description does not need to explain parameters further since none exist. No additional parameter semantics are required.

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 '列出任务管理中的任务' clearly states the tool lists tasks within the task management module. It uses a specific verb (list) and resource (tasks), and is not a tautology. However, it does not differentiate from other list tools by specifying scope or context, though no sibling tool appears directly related to tasks.

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, or when not to use it. The description offers no context about suitable scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without direction in selecting this tool among many similar list_* siblings.

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