List labels

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It transparently discloses that labels come from existing tasks and that Goby has no labels endpoint, which meaningfully shapes expectations. It could add output format details, but the core caveat is covered.

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 sentence that front-loads the core purpose and adds a concise parenthetical caveat. There is no fluff or 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?

The description is sufficient for a simple, parameterless listing tool. It states what is listed徒 and the main limitation. A small gap is not describing the response shape, but that is minor given the simplicity and absence of an output schema.

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 tool takes no parameters elaborately, so there is little for the description to add. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description does clarify the semantic scope ('labels in use on the team's tasks').

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 identifies the resource ('labels in use on the team's tasks') and the tool's purpose (listing them). It also distinguishes this from a generic label endpoint by noting labels are harvested from existing tasks.

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 context about what the tool returns and a key limitation (labels not yet used won't appear). There are no alternative label tools among siblings, so no explicit when-not-to-use guidance is needed.

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