Search tasks

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

The description goes beyond the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations by disclosing key behaviors: case-insensitive substring matching, client-side filtering due to lack of API search endpoint, and the note that completed tasks may be hidden unless 'completed' or 'all' is used. This adds substantial behavioral context.

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: the first states purpose and scope, the second explains the technical mechanism and intended use. It is front-loaded, concise, and 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?

Given the tool's simplicity, 100% schema coverage, and provided annotations, the description is complete. It explains what the tool does, how it works, and when to use it. The absence of an output schema is acceptable because return format is not critical for a search tool and the description adequately implies results.

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% — both 'query' and 'include' have clear descriptions. The tool description does not add meaning beyond the schema for these parameters; it mostly reiterates the query scope. Therefore, the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's function: 'Find tasks whose title or notes contain the query, across every list.' It uses a specific verb ('Find'), identifies the resource ('tasks'), and specifies scope ('across every list'), effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools that operate on single lists or tasks.

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?

Provides explicit usage context with 'Use it to locate a task before acting on it.' It also explains the client-side filtering rationale, which implies when it is appropriate. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or give when-not-to-use guidance, so it stops short of a 5.

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