list_task_instances

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds that it returns states and timings, but does not elaborate on pagination behavior, filtering capabilities, or any other operational traits. With annotations covering the read-only nature, the description provides minimal extra behavioral context.

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 a single sentence with 8 words, front-loading the key action. It is concise and avoids fluff, but it is at the edge of being too terse.

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 5 parameters and an output schema, the description is minimal. It does not mention filtering by state, pagination, or limits. The output schema likely documents return values, so the description is adequate but incomplete for a full understanding without consulting the schema.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so all parameters are already documented in the schema. The tool description does not add any additional meaning or usage hints beyond what is in the schema, such as explaining the limit cap or state filtering. Baseline is 3 because schema covers the parameters.

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 task instances within a DAG run and mentions it returns states and timings. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_task_instance (single) and clear_task_instances (delete). The verb 'list' and resource 'task instances' are specific.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_task_instance or list_dag_runs. The context is implied by the name and description, but there are no when-not-to-use instructions or sibling comparisons.

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