list_text_to_image_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, yet it discloses nothing about pagination behavior, default ordering, result limits, or whether all tasks or only the caller's tasks are returned. The only behavioral hint is the sort_by ordering values, which the enum already conveys.

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, front-loaded with the core action, with no filler. It is efficient, though the second sentence restates information already encoded in the sort_by enum and could have been spent on the undocumented paging parameters.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, the description is the only source of truth and it covers only the ordering argument. An agent still cannot tell how results are paged, what the response shape is, or how this differs from sibling list_* tools.

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% across three parameters. The description explains sort_by values (restating the enum) but says nothing about page_num or page_size — no defaults, no max page size, no zero- vs one-based indexing — leaving half the surface undocumented anywhere.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ("List ... text-to-image tasks") and narrows scope with "previously created". It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as retrieve_text_to_image_task or list_image_to_image_tasks, but the list/retrieve distinction is at least implicit in the wording.

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 statement of when to use this tool versus retrieve_text_to_image_task (single task lookup) or stream_text_to_image_task. No prerequisites, no mention of what happens with no page arguments, and no exclusions are given.

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