gws.tasks.list_tasklists

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the primary safety profile is covered. The description adds behavioral context by specifying the returned fields (title and ID) and the special default-list behavior ('@default'), which is valuable beyond the 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 three dense sentences with no filler. The first states the core purpose, the second specifies output fields, and the third gives high-value integration instructions about reusing list IDs and the default fallback. Every sentence 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?

Given the one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the necessary operations, return values, and how the results will be consumed by sibling tools. It even explains the 'tasklist' argument behavior across the tasks tool group, making the description self-sufficient for an agent.

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?

There is only one optional parameter, 'account', and the schema already describes it fully as 'Account label or email. Uses default if omitted.' The description does not add further syntax or behavior details about the parameter, so it stays at baseline coverage.

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 opens with a specific action: 'List the account's Google Tasks task lists.' It clearly names the resource type and explicitly states the return shape (title and ID), making it obviously distinct from the sibling gws.tasks.list, which lists tasks themselves.

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 explains how to consume this tool's output: 'Use a returned list ID as the 'tasklist' argument to the other tasks tools; omit 'tasklist' there to target the account's default list.' It gives practical when-to-use guidance for downstream operation, but it does not explicitly contrast with gws.tasks.list or state exclusions.

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