filter_tasks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. However, it only mentions filtering capabilities and omits details about performance implications, sorting behavior, or that the tool returns tasks. This is insufficient for a complex tool.

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 to the point. However, it could be structured to list key features more clearly.

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 36 parameters and no output schema, the description is too brief. It fails to explain what the tool returns (list of tasks), how pagination works via the limit parameter, or any side effects. The tool's complexity demands more context.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description provides no additional meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline but not exceeding it.

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 it is for advanced task filtering with unlimited perspective combinations, listing specific filters like status, dates, projects, tags, and search. This distinctly differentiates it from simpler sibling tools like get_inbox_tasks or get_flagged_tasks.

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 use when complex filtering is needed, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare with alternatives. Sibling tools exist for specific perspectives, but no guidance is provided on selection criteria.

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