get_ai_tasks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. The description explains what data is returned and the filtering criteria, but does not mention whether the operation is read-only, permissions required, pagination, or rate limits. Given the 'get' prefix it is likely safe, but more clarity would improve transparency.

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 paragraph of three sentences, all relevant and front-loaded. It is concise but could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points for output fields). No wasted words.

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 the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description is complete. It covers what the tool does, the criteria for selection, and the specific fields included in each task. No additional context is needed for correct invocation.

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, so the schema is trivial. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining the output fields and filtering conditions. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, which is appropriate here.

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 explicitly states the tool retrieves tasks ready for AI development, specifying source columns ('Баги' and 'Готово к разработке') and a required flag (ai_dev=true). This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling 'get_task', which likely retrieves a single task by ID.

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 clearly indicates when to use this tool (for tasks flagged for AI development). It does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives to sibling tools, but the context strongly implies use cases.

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