get_tasks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions pagination and filters but does not disclose other behavioral traits such as whether the operation is read-only, what default page size is, how filters are applied, or any authentication/rate-limit considerations. The minimal phrasing 'get list' offers little beyond the obvious.

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, concise sentence that conveys the core purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and earns its place.

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 description states the return type ('list of tasks') and mentions pagination and filters, but it does not elaborate on default behaviors, field selection, or how filters work in practice. Given the absence of an output schema and annotations, this is somewhat thin, though the schema's rich parameter descriptions compensate partially.

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 covers all parameters with detailed descriptions (100% coverage), so the description adds little new meaning. It references pagination and filters generally, which aligns with the schema's offset/pageSize and filters/filterId parameters, but does not explain any additional semantic nuance.

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's function: 'Get a list of tasks from Planfix with pagination and filters.' It uses a specific verb (get), identifies the resource (tasks), and explicitly mentions pagination and filters, which distinguishes it from the singular sibling get_task.

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 is for retrieving a list of tasks, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_task or other list tools. No exclusions or alternative suggestions are given, so usage context is only implicit.

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