List recent Nuke tasks newest first, with an optional limit to control response size.
List recent tasks, newest first.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | max number of records to return. Defaults to 50. The store is bounded only by the purge schedule, so without a cap a busy session could leak hundreds of completed records into a single response. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds ordering (newest first), which is useful. But it omits pagination, whether it returns only recent/incomplete tasks, and what 'recent' means – notable gaps for a list tool.
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?
One compact sentence with the ordering constraint front-loaded. No filler.
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 list tool with one fully-described parameter and a readOnly annotation, this is minimally adequate. However, it lacks guidance on result size, pagination, and how it relates to tasks_get, leaving the agent to fill gaps.
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 the single limit parameter is fully documented in the schema, including the rationale for capping. The description adds no parameter detail beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 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 a specific verb (List) and resource (tasks) with ordering detail (newest first). It doesn't explicitly distinguish from tasks_get or tasks_cancel, but the plural 'tasks' and 'List' make the shape clear enough.
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 when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives like tasks_get for a single task, and no exclusion conditions. The agent has to infer from the name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.