conduyt_list_tasks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It names some return fields, but says nothing about pagination behavior (page/per_page exist in the schema), default result volume, whether results are scoped to the caller, or permission requirements for a filter-heavy listing.

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 front-loaded sentences with no filler: the action first, then the return shape. Nothing is wasted.

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 14-parameter listing tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is thin: it omits the tab scoping, sort/order, search, overdue, and deal/contact linkage filters entirely, and covers only a partial subset of returned fields. An agent still needs the schema to call it correctly and gets no behavioral 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% across all 14 parameters, so the schema already defines tab, sort, order, search, dealId, contactId, overdue, and date-range semantics. The description only echoes three filters (assignee, status, due date) and adds nothing beyond the schema, warranting the baseline 3.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List tasks') plus its filtering capability, so the agent knows it's a read/collection operation. It does not distinguish itself from siblings like get_task or the broader search, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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 indication of when to use this versus get_task, search, or list_deals; no prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is only implied by the verb 'List'.

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