get_custom_perspective_tasks

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

No annotations provided, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It only states the read action ('Get tasks') but omits details like error handling, permission needs, or effects. The schema parameters cover inputs but not behaviors.

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 concise sentences with no redundancy. Front-loaded with the core action and usage context. Every word adds value.

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 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain the return format, error cases, or behavior for missing perspectives. More detail is needed given the tool's complexity.

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%: all 6 parameters have detailed schema descriptions. The tool description adds no additional parameter context beyond what is already in the schema, so baseline score of 3 applies.

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?

Clearly states 'Get tasks from a specific OmniFocus custom perspective by name' and distinguishes from tag-based tools with 'Use when the user refers to a custom view, not a tag.' This provides a specific verb and resource, and explicitly contrasts with sibling tools like get_tasks_by_tag.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use: 'when the user refers to a custom view, not a tag.' This clearly differentiates from tag-related tools but does not offer alternative tools for other scenarios or exclude misuse.

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