List subtasks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds the recursive option and the notion of showing 'full hierarchy', which gives an agent insight into the tool's behavior beyond the schema annotation. It does not contradict annotations.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that states the verb, resource, and key optional behavior without any filler. Every word contributes to the tool's purpose and usage.

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?

For a low-complexity read-only tool with no required parameters, an output schema, and full parameter descriptions, the description is sufficient. An agent can correctly invoke the tool and understand its behavior without additional 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all three parameters. The description mentions 'recursive' in a way that aligns with the schema's default and meaning, but does not add information beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb ('List'), a concrete resource ('children (subtasks) of a task'), and adds the optional recursive behavior. This clearly differentiates it from siblings like get_task_by_id or filter_tasks, which focus on individual tasks or broad filtering rather than parent-child hierarchy.

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 provides a clear context: use this when you need to list subtasks of a given task. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the purpose is specific enough that the intended usage is unambiguous. No exclusions are mentioned, but the context is clear.

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