asana_list_tasks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds behavioral context about pagination ('Paginated') and the workspace default for assignee queries, which goes beyond annotations. However, it omits details like maximum page size or what happens if no anchor is provided, which would enrich transparency.

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?

Three concise sentences with zero filler. The core action is front-loaded, followed by the key constraint, then a useful default-behavior note. 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?

For a list tool with 9 parameters, 100% schema coverage, and full safety annotations, the description covers the critical aspects: anchor exclusivity, pagination, and assignee workspace default. It does not explicitly state what happens when no anchor is provided or when multiple anchors are given, which could be ambiguous, but the schema and annotations fill most 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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds semantic value by clarifying that exactly one anchor must be used and that assignee falls back to the workspace default, which supplements the individual parameter descriptions. It does not provide deep syntax or format details beyond the schema, as the schema already does that.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('tasks'), and enumerates the four filtering anchors (project, section, tag, assignee). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like asana_get_task (single task) or asana_search_tasks (search-based) by emphasizing the anchor-based listing.

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 provides clear selection guidance: provide exactly one anchor among the four options. This implies when to use the tool (when you know a project/section/tag/assignee) and prevents misuse by enforcing mutual exclusivity. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion conditions, but the anchor constraint is a strong usage guideline.

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