fetch_tasks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It implies a read operation ('List') but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like pagination defaults, rate limits, authentication needs, or what happens if no tasks exist. The description is minimal and leaves key behaviors unspecified.

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 very concise—a single sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action ('List tasks') and lists parameters efficiently. However, it's so brief that it risks under-specification, slightly reducing its effectiveness.

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 no annotations, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and 3 parameters, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavior, parameter usage, and output format, making it inadequate for a tool with multiple optional parameters. More context is needed for effective use.

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%, so the description must compensate. It lists parameters ('per_page, page, story_id') but adds no meaning beyond their names—no explanation of units, formats, or effects. For example, it doesn't clarify if 'story_id' filters tasks by story or if pagination is zero-based. This fails to compensate for the schema gap.

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 states the verb 'List' and resource 'tasks', which provides a basic purpose. However, it's vague about scope (e.g., all tasks, filtered tasks) and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'fetch_stories' or 'fetch_assets' beyond the resource name. It's functional but lacks specificity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lists parameters but doesn't mention context like filtering by user, workspace, or status, or prerequisites. It's a bare listing without usage context.

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