get_tasks

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

Description contradicts schema: description says defaults to pending and in_progress, but schema default is 'all' which includes pending+in_progress+blocked. Also lacks any mention of whether the operation is read-only or has side effects, though no annotations exist.

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?

Two clear, front-loaded sentences with no redundant information. 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?

Covers purpose, default behavior, and usage context. Lacks mention of returned fields format or any limits (e.g., pagination). The contradiction with schema reduces completeness. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 is 100% so baseline 3, but description's default behavior statement contradicts the schema's default value (all vs pending+in_progress). The description does not add meaningful additional parameter context beyond what schema provides.

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 'Get tasks for the current project' with a specific verb and resource, and mentions filtering by status, distinguishing it from sibling mutation tools like save_task or update_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?

Provides explicit usage guidance: 'Use at session start to pick up where you left off.' However, it does not mention when not to use or alternatives among siblings, though no direct alternative exists for reading tasks.

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