list-tasks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral burden, but it merely summarizes capabilities already present in the schema. It does not disclose additional traits such as return format, rate limits, or error behavior, and repeats information like 'optional filter, sort, and pagination' without adding value.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and lists filter examples without fluff. Every word earns its place.

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 schema richly documents all parameters, making the tool usable, but the description itself adds little beyond a quick summary. It omits return behavior (no output schema exists) and does not mention pagination details or the single-filter limit, though these are in the schema. Adequate but with gaps.

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 coverage is high (88%), so the baseline is 3. The description adds useful filter examples (done, due_date with operators, priority, matter_id, contact_id) that help the agent understand valid filter attributes and operator usage, going beyond the schema's generic descriptions.

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 lists tasks, with optional filtering, sorting, and pagination. It distinguishes itself from sibling list tools (list-matters, list-contacts) by the resource, and from create-task/update-task by being a read operation.

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 on what the tool does (list tasks with options) and gives examples of useful filters. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or point to alternatives, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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