List Request tasks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing: no pagination behavior, no note that results are scoped to the request_id, no indication of read-only safety, and no mention of the nested list_info controls that materially change the response.

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 single sentence is technically free of waste, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It occupies no space and delivers no information, which is a deficiency, not efficiency.

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 tool with a nested object parameter, a required request_id, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is completely inadequate. Everything an agent needs to call it correctly, including what a "request task" is and how list_info shapes the result, is missing.

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% across both parameters. request_id (accepting integer or numeric string) and the entire nested list_info object with its eight sub-fields are undocumented in both schema and description, so the agent has no semantic guidance for any input.

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?

"List request tasks" merely restates the tool name and title with no additional specificity. It does not distinguish this tool from siblings like list_tasks, get_request_task, or list_requests, leaving the agent to guess the scope (tasks belonging to one request).

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings such as get_request_task, list_tasks, and list_requests available, the description provides nothing to route the agent between a single-task fetch, a global task list, or this per-request listing.

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