proxmox_tasks

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the 'most recent first' ordering, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not state that this is a read-only listing, note any pagination or rate-limit behavior, or mention the default cap (`limit`) semantics beyond what the schema already says.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with the ordering behavior appended and zero filler. Every clause earns its place.

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 simple read-only listing tool with full schema coverage and an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose, scope, and ordering. Minor omissions (explicit read-only nature, pagination/limit interaction) keep it just short of complete.

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 `node`, `limit`, and `instance` are already fully documented in the schema, and an output schema exists. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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') with a clearly scoped resource ('recent tasks ... recorded on a Proxmox node') and even enumerates task types (backups, migrations, VM actions). This is readily distinguishable from siblings like proxmox_vms or proxmox_nodes, though it does not explicitly name them to reinforce the distinction.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is for inspecting node task history, but there is no statement of when to prefer this over alternatives or any exclusions/prerequisites. Adequate but with a clear gap.

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