list_tasks

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral transparency burden. It clearly implies a read-only list operation but does not disclose pagination behavior, default ordering, how filters combine, or response shape.

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 two short, efficient sentences with the core action front-loaded and no wasted words. It quickly tells the agent what the tool does and the available filtering dimensions.

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?

The schema fully documents all six optional parameters, and the tool is a relatively simple list operation. However, with no output schema or annotations, the description omits return format, default pagination behavior, and filter-combination semantics.

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 100%, so each parameter is already documented. The description's filter list adds high-level context but no additional semantic meaning beyond what the input schema provides.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('tasks in amoCRM'), and names concrete filter dimensions (entity, completion status, responsible user). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_leads, list_contacts, and list_companies.

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 implies the tool's purpose but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or note exclusions. Sibling context suggests this is the primary task-listing tool, but no direct comparison is provided.

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