bitrix24_task_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. The description omits important details such as pagination behavior, rate limits, or side effects. The schema includes a note about truncation at 1000 without limit, but that is not reflected in the description.

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 a single sentence, which is concise and includes key information. However, it could be slightly more informative by including brief behavioral notes without adding much length.

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 lack of output schema, the description does not explain the return value structure. It also does not mention the truncation behavior or pagination. With 4 parameters and nested objects, more context would be helpful, but it is minimally sufficient.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds examples of filter criteria (status, responsible user), but these are already present in the schema descriptions. No additional meaning beyond the schema is provided.

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 verb ('list and filter') and resource ('Bitrix24 tasks'), with examples of filter criteria. This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like bitrix24_task_get (single task) or bitrix24_task_create.

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 implies usage for listing and filtering tasks, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not clarify that for a single task details, one should use bitrix24_task_get. General guidance is adequate but not explicit.

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