list_tasks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'retrieve' suggesting a read operation but does not explicitly state safety, idempotency, or lack of side effects. No rate limits, auth needs, or behavioral traits beyond the basic retrieval are disclosed.

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 sentences: the first states the main purpose, the second adds contextual value. It is concise and front-loaded without superfluous words, though it could be slightly more specific about filtering.

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 (4 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, numerous sibling list tools), the description is too sparse. It does not mention pagination, response structure, or how the parameters interact. Users need to infer from the schema alone, which is insufficient for complete understanding.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the input schema already explains all 4 parameters. The description adds the generic phrase 'optional filtering' but does not provide additional meaning or examples beyond what the schema offers. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 the action (retrieve) and resource (tasks), with optional filtering. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like create_task, delete_task, and get_task by focusing on listing. The addition that tasks are building blocks for time tracking provides useful context.

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 implies usage for retrieving multiple tasks with optional filters, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_task for single tasks or list_project_task_assignments for assignments. No when-not or alternative conditions are stated.

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