taiga_tasks_voters

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

No annotations are provided, so the description itself must disclose behavioral aspects. It conveys that this is a read-only 'list' operation, which is transparent. However, it does not mention potential pagination, required permissions, or response structure, but these are not critical for a simple list operation.

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, direct sentence that immediately states the action and object. No filler or redundant information, perfectly concise.

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?

For a simple list-by-ID tool with a fully described schema, the description is adequate. It does not explain return format, but 'list voters' implies a collection of voters, and the tool's simplicity reduces the need for more detail.

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 has 100% description coverage for the single parameter 'id' as 'Task ID'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 specific verb 'List' and resource 'voters of a task', making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It also naturally distinguishes this from sibling tools for epics, user stories, and issues by explicitly saying '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?

The description implies usage for retrieving the list of voters for a given task ID. It does not explicitly compare to alternatives like watchers or upvote/downvote tools, but the simplicity of the operation makes the context clear enough.

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