list_text_to_3d_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. 'List previously created' lightly implies a read-only, non-destructive operation, but nothing is said about pagination behavior (defaults, max page_size, whether page_num is 1-based), result ordering defaults, or whether the list is scoped to the caller's workspace.

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?

Two short sentences with the primary purpose front-loaded and no filler. The second sentence is slightly redundant with the schema enum, but it is cheap and draws attention to the only documented parameter.

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?

For a paginated list tool with three parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is thin: it never explains what a page of results looks like, how to page through them, or what the default ordering is. An agent could call it, but not confidently or efficiently.

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 0% and only sort_by is addressed, and even then the description merely restates the two enum values already present in the schema. page_num and page_size — the parameters most likely to be misused — get no meaning, defaults, or constraints in either the schema or the description.

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 names a specific verb+resource (list text-to-3d tasks) and scopes it to previously created tasks, which an agent can separate from the many retrieve_/create_/stream_ siblings by naming convention alone. It stops short of explicitly contrasting itself with retrieve_text_to_3d_task or list_image_to_3d_tasks, so it is clear but not fully 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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus retrieve_text_to_3d_task (single task) or any other list_* sibling, and no mention of how pagination should be used. Usage is only implied by the verb 'List'.

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