tasks_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It merely states 'List tasks' without mentioning whether completed tasks are included by default, how pagination works (max_results), or any ordering/filtering behavior. This is insufficient for an agent to predict the tool's default behavior.

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 concise, with two short sentences and no redundant wording. It is front-loaded with the core purpose. However, it is under-specified for the tool's complexity, so while concise, it does not fully serve its informational purpose.

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 the tool has three optional parameters with meaningful defaults (e.g., show_completed=false) and no annotations, the description is too sparse. The presence of an output schema covers return formatting, but the description does not explain how to filter results or what the default listing includes. It is minimally functional but not complete for effective tool selection and invocation.

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%, meaning the description explains none of the three parameters. The only hint, 'Use @default for the primary list,' merely repeats the schema default for tasklist_id and adds no semantic meaning. The agent gets no explanation of max_results or show_completed, so the description fails to compensate for the missing parameter info.

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 the action ('List tasks') and the resource ('in a task list'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like tasks_list_tasklists (which lists task lists) and tasks_create/update/delete (which modify tasks). The additional hint 'Use @default for the primary list' reinforces a specific use case.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only mentions a parameter value ('@default') rather than explaining scenarios where this tool is appropriate or where other task-related tools should be used instead.

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