List tasks

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description does not need to repeat safety information. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context beyond the filter list, missing details like pagination behavior (covered in schema but not enhanced), default ordering, or response format.

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 that front-loads the verb and resource, lists filters efficiently, and contains no superfluous words.

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 8 optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the filtering intent but lacks information about default behavior (e.g., what happens when no filters are applied), pagination details, and return format. It is minimally adequate but leaves gaps.

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?

With 50% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explicitly listing the filter parameters (matter, status, priority, due date range, assignee), which maps to 6 of 8 parameters. It does not mention limit and page_size, which are documented in the schema, so overall it adds meaningful semantic grouping but misses two parameters.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Lists' and the resource 'tasks', and specifies optional filters (matter, status, priority, due date range, assignee). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like clio_get_task (single task retrieval) and clio_create_task (creation).

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?

Usage context is implied via the list of optional filters, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., clio_get_task for a specific task). The description does not state when not to use it or mention any prerequisites.

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