bernstein_tasks

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It correctly indicates a read operation (list), but provides no additional behavioral details such as pagination, rate limits, or default behavior when status is omitted. This is adequate but minimal.

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 extremely concise, containing two short paragraphs for Args and Returns. Every sentence provides necessary information without waste, and the key purpose is front-loaded.

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's simplicity (one optional parameter, no annotations, output schema present), the description is complete. It specifies the parameter and its filtering options, implies default behavior (all tasks when status is null), and notes the return format as JSON array of task objects.

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 lists valid values for the status parameter (open, claimed, in_progress, etc.), adding meaning beyond the schema's basic type definition. This is helpful and largely covers the parameter's semantics.

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 from the Bernstein server,' using a specific verb (list) and resource (tasks). It is distinct from sibling tools like bernstein_approve or bernstein_run, which perform different actions.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of context, exclusions, or when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer based only on the name and siblings.

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