get_all_tasks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It indicates this is a read operation by 'Get all tasks', but does not explicitly state that it is non-destructive or mention other behavioral aspects like rate limits or authentication. A score of 3 is appropriate as it provides the basic function but lacks depth.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main action and scope, then provides usage guidance. Every sentence is essential and there is no waste.

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 that the tool has an output schema, the description does not need to explain return values. It adequately covers the tool's scope and filtering capability. It could mention that results might be large due to 'all tasks', but it is still sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's purpose.

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 50% of parameters (label has description, debug does not). The description adds value by stating 'optional label filtering', which reinforces the label parameter's purpose. However, it does not address the debug parameter. Thus, the description provides marginal additional meaning beyond the schema.

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 clearly states it retrieves all tasks across all projects with optional label filtering, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool get_daily_productivity_overview by noting that this is a comprehensive search.

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 explicitly says 'Use when you need to search/filter across your entire task system' and suggests an alternative for daily focus. This provides clear guidance on when to use this tool, though it does not explicitly list when not to use it.

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