grocy_tasks_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered, but the description adds nothing beyond restating the endpoint: no indication of ordering, whether overdue tasks are flagged, whether completed tasks are excluded server-side, or what the payload looks like.

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?

It is two very short sentences with the scope stated first. The trailing 'GET /api/tasks.' conveys little to a model-driven caller but costs almost nothing in space.

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 zero-parameter read tool with annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate: an agent knows it yields unfinished tasks. It stops short of saying what a task record contains or how results are ordered, which for a list endpoint is the main remaining ambiguity.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline 4 applies; the only gap is that no optional server-side filtering is mentioned, which is not required for a parameterless call.

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?

It names the resource (tasks) and the filter ('not done yet'), so the purpose is inferrable, but there is no verb such as 'list' and no differentiation from the sibling task tools (grocy_task_complete, grocy_task_undo). The API path adds nothing that clarifies intent.

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 call this instead of grocy_task_complete or grocy_task_undo, and no stated preconditions. An agent must infer the listing role purely from the phrase 'not done yet'.

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