notion_get_tasks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds the output fields and filter semantics. However, it does not disclose pagination, ordering, or what happens when no filters are supplied. There is no contradiction with the annotations.

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 compact and well-structured with Purpose, Args, and Returns sections. It front-loads the main query capability and avoids unnecessary filler, though the Args section partially duplicates schema information.

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 read-only query tool with an output schema and read-only annotations, the description covers the invocation, filter options, and returned fields well. Minor gaps such as pagination and ordering are not critical for first-time correct use.

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 contextual signal reports 0% schema description coverage for the top-level params object, and the description compensates by documenting params.status, params.due_before, and params.due_after with allowed status values and date-filter behavior. This makes correct invocation clear even though the nested schema also contains some of the same details.

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 verb and resource: 'Query the Notion Tasks database with optional filters', and it lists the returned fields. It does not explicitly differentiate this tool from the sibling notion_get_overdue_tasks, which overlaps when filtering by Overdue status.

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 when the agent needs Notion tasks with optional status/date filters and mentions Notion URLs for calendar linking, but it provides no explicit guidance about when to prefer this tool over alternatives like notion_get_overdue_tasks.

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