tasks_search_text

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states 'READ-ONLY', which is a key safety signal. It also discloses the local filtering and paginated traversal approach, implying that the tool may be slower and generate many REST requests—important operational context. It does not mention specific output or error behavior, but the basics are covered.

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, compact sentence with the critical 'READ-ONLY' flag front-loaded. It avoids redundancy and every phrase earns its place by conveying purpose and method 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 absence of an output schema and annotations, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, read-only nature, and the search mechanism. The parameter schema is extremely detailed, covering pagination and filtering options. While it doesn't describe return values, for a search tool this is often self-evident, and the description is sufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 each parameter already has a description. The tool description adds overarching context about local filtering and pagination, which informs understanding of max_pages and max_results, but it does not add detail to individual parameters beyond what the schema already provides. Thus the 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 states a specific action: find text in task titles and descriptions. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like tasks_search_comments, which searches comments. The method (local filtering with paginated traversal) is also mentioned, adding precision.

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 clear context: use when you need to search for text within task titles or descriptions. It does not explicitly list alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, but the context is sufficiently clear for an AI agent to select this tool appropriately among siblings.

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