Currently running tasks

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds that tasks are those 'executing right now', a useful temporal scoping. However, it leaves the return representation ambiguous (a list of tasks vs. a boolean busy flag), which is a behavioral detail an agent would need.

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?

Two sentences with no redundancy: the first states what is returned, the second states its operational meaning. Every word earns its place and the key scoping ('executing right now') is front-loaded.

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 zero-parameter read-only tool with annotations covering safety, the description is mostly sufficient. The meaningful gap is the output shape: are running tasks returned as a list, or is the result a boolean busy indicator? The name and first sentence suggest a list, but 'tells you whether' suggests boolean, leaving an agent to guess.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema coverage is trivially 100%. There is nothing for the description to add about parameters, so the zero-parameter baseline of 4 applies.

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 conveys that the tool retrieves tasks currently executing and augments that with a practical purpose ('tells you whether the instance is busy'). It is specific about the resource and state, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools to differentiate from list_tasks or 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?

'Tells you whether the instance is busy' gives a clear use case: checking if the system is occupied before proceeding. It does not mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is direct enough for an agent to select it for busy-state checks.

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