tasks_stale

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It explicitly discloses the read-only nature ('READ-ONLY') and adds a behavioral detail about the date basis ('по createdDate'). It does not describe return format, but for a simple read-only query tool this is sufficient.

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 front-loaded sentence that states the key purpose and read-only nature without unnecessary detail. Every word earns its place, and it is easily scannable.

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 schema is fully documented and the tool is a straightforward filtered list, the description provides enough context to select and invoke the tool correctly. The minor ambiguity around 'на стадии дольше N дней' vs 'по createdDate' prevents a perfect score.

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 already provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all five parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds only a loose mapping between N days and min_age_days, plus the createdDate hint, without significant new parameter meaning.

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 tool lists long-lived tasks ('задачи-долгожители') that have been in a stage longer than N days, based on createdDate. It uses a specific verb and resource with scope, distinguishing it from siblings like tasks_by_stage or tasks_in_progress.

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 clearly implies use for finding stale tasks, and the READ-ONLY label helps set expectations. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternative task list tools, so it stops short of full guidance.

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