list_cluster_tasks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the HTTP path 'GET /cluster/tasks', which conveys nothing about payload shape, pagination, or what a 'cluster task' actually is — minimal added context.

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?

Extremely short and front-loaded, which is good, but the second fragment ('GET /cluster/tasks') largely restates the first rather than adding information, so the brevity comes at the cost of content rather than being earned economy.

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 no-param read tool this could be adequate, but with no output schema the description should at least hint at what cluster tasks are and how they relate to the numerous task-oriented siblings. As written, an agent has no basis for choosing this over list_tasks or list_global_tasks.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the schema is trivially complete. Baseline 4 applies.

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?

States the resource being fetched ('Cluster Tasks') with a generic 'get' verb, so the agent knows it retrieves cluster tasks. However, it leaves the verb ambiguous against the name's 'list' and never distinguishes it from near-neighbors like clear_cluster_tasks, list_tasks, or get_cluster_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?

No indication of when to use this versus the many other list/get tools in the family, nor any exclusion such as 'not for task history — use list_recent_tasks'. Usage must be inferred entirely from the name.

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