find_tasks

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits like pagination (top/skip), filtering, or idempotency. It only says 'list tasks', omitting mention of pagination limits, optional filters, or lack of side effects, making it insufficient for safe agent use.

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 very short, but it is under-specified rather than concise. While it avoids unnecessary words, it lacks critical information, earning a middle score for being too terse.

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 5 parameters (including pagination and filters) and an output schema, the description is incomplete. It should mention pagination and filtering capabilities to help the agent use the tool effectively, but it does not.

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%, so the description must compensate. It does not explain any parameter (top, skip, status, matter_id, assignee_id) beyond their names, failing to add semantic value for correct invocation.

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 'List tasks (to-dos) on matters', using the verb 'list' and resource 'tasks' with context 'on matters'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_task (creation) and other find_* tools (different resources), though it could be more specific about the scope.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to filter by matter vs. using find_tasks by itself. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage from schema.

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