get_inbox_tasks

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

Annotations declare read-only and non-destructive behavior. Description adds context on subtask counts and tree expansion, but omits that hideCompleted defaults to true (hiding completed tasks). This default behavior is only in schema, not description.

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?

Single sentence with no wasted words. Front-loads the main action and key features. Efficient and clear.

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?

Covers the main purpose and subtask features. However, missing mention of default hiding of completed tasks and exact behavior of counts. With no output schema, slightly more detail would be beneficial.

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 covers all 3 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). Description adds minor context with 'direct subtask counts', but the schema is self-sufficient. 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?

Clearly states 'Get inbox tasks' and adds distinguishing features: direct subtask counts and optional subtask-tree expansion. Differentiates from sibling tools like filter_tasks or get_flagged_tasks by specifying inbox scope.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as filter_tasks or get_flagged_tasks. The description implies usage for inbox tasks, but does not provide criteria for selection.

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