get_tasks_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure but only states the basic action. It doesn't mention whether this is a read-only operation, what permissions are required, how results are returned (pagination, format), rate limits, or any other behavioral characteristics beyond the minimal 'get' operation.

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 at just 5 words, front-loading the essential information with zero wasted words. It efficiently communicates the core purpose without unnecessary elaboration.

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 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what kind of list is returned, how results are structured, whether there's pagination, or any behavioral context. The minimal description fails to compensate for the lack of structured metadata.

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?

With 83% schema description coverage, the schema already documents most parameters well, especially the 'filter' parameter with extensive examples. The description adds no parameter information beyond what's in the schema, so it meets the baseline expectation but doesn't enhance understanding of parameter usage or interactions.

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 action ('Get') and resource ('tasks list from Todoist'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from sibling tools like 'get_tasks' or 'get_completed_tasks', which would require more specific scope information.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With sibling tools like 'get_tasks' and 'get_completed_tasks' available, there's no indication of how this list retrieval differs from those other retrieval operations or when one should be preferred over another.

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