proxmox_get_tasks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only says 'get recent tasks/operations', which implies a read-only operation without side effects, but does not explain the return format, default sorting, what 'recent' means, or whether it includes pending/completed tasks. This is minimal disclosure beyond the tool's name.

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 a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the key verb and object. It avoids unnecessary words but is slightly generic. Given the simplicity of the tool, this is appropriately sized, though a bit more detail could be included without bloat.

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 operation with fully described parameters, the description provides adequate context to understand the tool's purpose. However, since there is no output schema, the description could be more specific about the returned data (e.g., list of task IDs, statuses, timestamps). The tool is not overly complex, but the description leaves some ambiguity about the exact nature of the tasks returned.

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 of 3 applies. The description itself adds no additional meaning to the parameters; it merely restates the tool's purpose. The schema already provides clear descriptions for node, limit, and device_id, which is sufficient.

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 that the tool retrieves recent tasks/operations from a Proxmox node, which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on the task log rather than node status, VM listing, or other operations. However, it could be more explicit about the scope (e.g., cluster-wide vs. node-specific) and how it differs from similar tools.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus other Proxmox-related tools in the sibling list. There is no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions. The only hint is the name 'get_tasks', which weakly implies usage for monitoring recent activity, but this is not elaborated.

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