blocked_tasks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does disclose the filtering criteria (dependencies or explicit blocking), but leaves ambiguity about what 'explicitly' means, whether the list is sorted, or if there are any error conditions. However, as a simple read-only listing, this level of detail is reasonable.

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, well-structured sentence with no redundant words. It is immediately front-loaded with the action and scope, making it easy to parse.

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 simplicity of the tool, the presence of an output schema, and one optional parameter fully described in the schema, the description covers the essential behavior. It slightly lacks contextual differentiation from sibling tools (e.g., list_tasks) but is otherwise adequate for an agent to use it correctly.

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?

The schema covers 100% of the parameters, including a clear description for 'path' ('Project root directory'), so the description does not need to add more. It adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides, which matches the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('tasks'), and adds a clear qualifier ('blocked') with two explicit categories ('by dependencies or explicitly'). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like list_tasks or next_task.

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 a use case (identifying blocked tasks) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_tasks. It does not mention exclusions or when not to use it, leaving the decision to the agent.

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