list_tasks

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

Annotations already mark it read-only and non-destructive, so the description only needs to add behavior on top. It adds 'recent' and pagination, but doesn't disclose ordering, time-window semantics, or whether tasks of all statuses are included. No contradiction with 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?

A single sentence that front-loads the core operation and appends the only usage hint needed. No filler 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?

Annotations, input constraints, and an output schema cover safety, bounds, and return shape. The description completes the picture with recency and pagination, though 'recent' is left somewhat vague and the sibling get_task_status is not mentioned.

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?

With zero parameter descriptions in the schema, the description must compensate. It does give start and limit a clear purpose (pagination), but it leaves 'node' to be inferred and doesn't define what start represents (offset). This is adequate but not thorough.

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?

'List recent node tasks' names a specific action and resource, and the 'recent' qualifier narrows the scope. It is clearly a list operation rather than a status lookup, but it doesn't explicitly contrast with get_task_status or list_nodes.

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 pagination hint ('use start and limit') is useful operational guidance, but there is no statement about when to choose this over get_task_status or when it should not be used. Sibling differentiation is left to the agent's inference.

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