clickup_view_tasks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: it returns a paginated array of task objects, honors the view's configured filters, sort order, and grouping, and implies read-only operation by using 'fetch'. However, it lacks details on error handling, rate limits, or authentication requirements, which are important for a tool with no annotations.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded, with the first sentence stating the core purpose and behavior, followed by a sentence on pagination and another on related tools. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it efficient and well-structured.

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's complexity (read operation with pagination), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is mostly complete: it explains what the tool does, its behavior, and usage context. However, it could improve by mentioning authentication needs or error cases, but it adequately covers the essentials for an agent to use it correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents both parameters thoroughly. The description does not add any additional meaning or context beyond what the schema provides for the parameters, such as 'view_id' or 'page'. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 specific action ('fetch the tasks currently visible in a ClickUp view') and resource ('tasks'), and distinguishes it from sibling tools by mentioning 'clickup_view_list' and 'clickup_view_get' for related operations. It specifies that it honors the view's configured filters, sort order, and grouping, making the purpose precise and differentiated.

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 explicitly provides when to use this tool ('fetch the tasks currently visible in a ClickUp view') and when to use alternatives ('Use clickup_view_list to discover view IDs and clickup_view_get for the view's definition'), offering clear guidance on prerequisites and related tools without ambiguity.

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