bernstein_tasks

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

The description indicates it is a read-only listing operation and returns a JSON array of task objects. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden, and it does so adequately without contradictions.

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 and uses a structured docstring format (Args, Returns). It is front-loaded with the core purpose. Some may consider the docstring slightly verbose for a simple tool, but it remains efficient.

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 one optional parameter and no required parameters, the description fully covers the purpose, parameter details, and return type. It is complete for a simple list operation.

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%, but the description provides a list of valid status values (open, claimed, in_progress, etc.), adding significant meaning beyond the schema's generic 'string or null' type.

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 tool lists tasks from the Bernstein server, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like bernstein_run or bernstein_create_subtask, which have different purposes.

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 mentions an optional status filter with a list of possible values, giving some guidance on usage. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., bernstein_health for status, bernstein_run for creation).

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