asana_list_dependencies

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the behavioral nuance that both directions (dependents and dependencies) are returned simultaneously, which is useful but not extensive; no pagination or format details are disclosed.

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?

A single well-structured sentence that front-loads the primary action ('Return'), specifies both outputs, and includes clear parenthetical definitions. Every word contributes, with no redundancy.

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 tool with one parameter and full annotation coverage, the description sufficiently conveys the core functionality. It lacks explicit output format details, but given no output schema and the straightforward nature of the listing, the information is adequate for correct invocation.

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 schema already documents task_gid as 'Task GID' with 100% coverage. The description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond indicating the task context. With a single fully documented parameter, the description has little room to add value.

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?

Description clearly states the tool returns both dependencies and dependents, with parenthetical explanations defining each direction. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like asana_add_dependency and asana_add_dependent by focusing on listing rather than modifying.

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 phrase 'in one call' implies a combined retrieval use case, and the description clearly defines what the tool returns. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it instead of alternatives or provide exclusions, though no direct alternative exists among siblings for listing both directions.

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