pbs_tasks_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It declares 'READ-ONLY' (no side effects), describes the return format as a list of task dicts, and notes the config requirement. It could be more detailed about error cases or behavior when node is unreachable, but overall it is fairly transparent.

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 concise, with five short sentences. It front-loads the purpose and read-only hint, and includes necessary details without extraneous information. Every sentence earns 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?

With an output schema present, the description doesn't need full return details but still describes the return format. It covers usage scenario, filtering, default node, and config requirement. It lacks mention of pagination or error handling, but for a list tool, it is fairly complete.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining filtering semantics ('running=True for active tasks, errors=True for failed ones') and the specific use case of checking UPIDs. This goes beyond what the schema provides, earning a 4.

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 PBS tasks on a node, specifies it is read-only, and describes the return format. It gives specific filtering options and a use case (checking on UPIDs from other tools), effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools that operate on different products.

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 explicitly advises using this tool to check on UPIDs from specific other tools, providing clear context. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternative tools for other products, but the context of PBS is clear from the name and description.

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