quire.searchTasks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description does not need to reiterate read-only behavior. However, it adds no further behavioral details such as pagination, result limits, or matching semantics, leaving some ambiguity.

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 two concise sentences with no extraneous information. It front-loads the core action and resource, efficiently earning 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?

Given 6 parameters, no output schema, and the presence of sibling search tools, the description is minimally complete. It covers basic purpose and parameters but lacks details on return structure, ordering, or behavior nuances like partial matching, which would aid completeness.

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% with descriptions for all parameters. The description summarizes parameters as 'keyword and optional filters' but adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score 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 tool searches for tasks in a project by keyword and optional filters, with a specific verb 'Search' and resource 'tasks'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like listTasks (which lists all tasks) and searchFolderTasks/searchOrganizationTasks (which search different scopes).

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 keyword-based task search within a project, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., listTasks for unfiltered listing, searchFolderTasks for folder-scoped search). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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