list_tasks

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that the parent filter uses client-side filtering, which implies performance note. However, it does not state read-only nature, authentication requirements, rate limits, or other behavioral traits.

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 that conveys key functionality concisely. It front-loads the action and lists filters. While compact, it lacks structural breakdown for readability.

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 11 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the primary purpose and a key behavioral note (client-side filter). However, it omits context on return format, error handling, and pagination behavior beyond what schema provides. Adequate but with gaps.

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 100% with detailed descriptions for each parameter. The description adds no new information beyond listing filter types and noting client-side filtering. Baseline 3 applies as schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Query tasks with filters...', specifying the verb and resource. It lists multiple filter types (assignee, status, dartboard, priority, etc.), making the purpose clear. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tool 'search_tasks', which may also query tasks with filters.

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 one behavioral note (client-side filtering for has_parent) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like search_tasks. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are given.

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