list_tasks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It reveals the default filter (only active tasks), explains hidden tasks behavior (tasks completed in apps become hidden), and clarifies the combination needed for harvesting completions. While it omits details like rate limits or authentication, the core listing behavior is transparent.

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?

The description is concise: two sentences that are front-loaded with the main action. Every word serves a purpose, with no redundancy or 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?

Given the tool has 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the essential behavioral aspects well. It explains default filtering, show flags, and a key nuance about hidden tasks. It does not describe the return format or pagination, but for a list tool, this is acceptable. The contextual completeness is high.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for all 7 parameters, so the baseline is 3. However, the description adds value by clarifying the interaction between showCompleted and showHidden for harvesting completions, which is not obvious from individual parameter descriptions. This extra context justifies a 4.

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 clearly states the tool lists tasks in a task list, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_tasklists (which lists task lists) and get_task (single task). It specifies the default behavior (only active tasks) and mentions show flags, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explains the default behavior (needsAction only) and how to use show* flags to include completed, hidden, or deleted tasks. It also provides a critical note about hidden tasks and harvesting completions. However, it does not explicitly list when to avoid this tool or suggest alternatives, but the usage context is well covered.

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