list_tasks

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals default terminal-task filtering and gives some parameter semantics, but does not describe interactions between filters, pagination, return format, or edge cases, leaving notable behavioral gaps.

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 three concise sentences, each adding distinct value: stating the core function, clarifying default filtering, and providing parameter guidance. There is no redundancy or filler.

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 a complex tool with 13 optional parameters and no annotation support, the description covers only a small subset of available filters and does not address how parameters combine or what the response contains. The output schema may help, but the description alone leaves the tool inadequately specified.

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 0%, and the description only explains 3 of the 13 parameters (include_terminal, parent_id, top_level_only). The other 10 filters (sort, labels, statuses, due_before, priorities, etc.) receive no semantic explanation, so the description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of detail.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('List tasks') and qualifies it with 'structured filters', making the core function clear. It implicitly distinguishes from siblings like search_tasks by emphasizing structured filtering, but does not explicitly name alternatives or contrast behavior.

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 practical context on default behavior (terminal tasks hidden) and when to use specific parameters like parent_id vs top_level_only. However, it does not explain when to choose list_tasks over search_tasks or get_task, lacking explicit exclusions or alternative guidance.

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