get_workspace_tasks

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as pagination, performance, authentication requirements, rate limits, or the scope of results (e.g., maximum results, pagination). It only describes what the tool does, not how it behaves.

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 extremely concise—two sentences with no extraneous words. It front-loads the core functionality and use case efficiently.

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 complexity of 14 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain output format, pagination, filter interaction, or expected behavior, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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 schema description coverage is only 29%, with many parameters lacking descriptions. The tool description does not add any parameter-level semantics beyond listing some filter types. It fails to compensate for the low schema coverage by explaining parameter syntax or behavior.

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 clearly states it is a filtered team-wide task search across the whole workspace, with explicit mention of filter types (space/folder/list ids, statuses, assignees, tags, due dates). It also distinguishes itself as the deep search for when the list is unknown, which differentiates it from sibling tools like get_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?

The description provides a specific use case: 'The deep search used when you don't know which list a task is in.' This gives context on when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or list alternatives, though the sibling list implies other task retrieval tools exist.

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