task_list

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

With no annotations, the description adds ordering and filter capability. It correctly implies a read operation without side effects, but lacks details on pagination, error handling, or default behavior beyond 'newest first'.

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 (2 sentences) but at the cost of omitting critical details about parameters and usage. It is not overly verbose, but it is incomplete.

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?

Without output schema or parameter descriptions, the description fails to specify return format, interpretation of filters, or relationship to sibling tools. It provides insufficient context for an agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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 coverage is 0% and the description only mentions 'optional filters' without detailing any of the 5 parameters. Parameter names (state, database, owner_agent, parent_task_id) provide some hint, but the description adds no semantic value.

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 it lists tasks with optional filters and specifies ordering (newest updated first). It distinguishes from sibling tools by action (list vs. search) and resource (tasks vs. agents, memory, etc.).

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 like memory_search or agent_list. No notes on prerequisites or filter combinations.

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