list_my_tasks

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose meaningful behavior — results are identity-scoped ('your own'), mesh-scoped ('active mesh'), and filtered to exclude Done/Cancelled — but says nothing about ordering, pagination, or whether tasks from other meshes appear. The filter semantics are the strongest contribution; the operational traits are absent.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the verb and scope, then parenthetically defines the 'open' filter. Nothing is wasted and nothing essential is buried.

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 listing tool with an output schema and full schema coverage, the definition covers scope and filtering well. Ordering and pagination behavior are the only notable omissions, and those may be handled by the output schema.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies; there is nothing for the description to clarify beyond the implicit filter that defines the result set.

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 gives a specific verb (List) and resource (your own open tasks) and then bounds the result set precisely: active mesh, excluding Done/Cancelled. No sibling in the toolset lists tasks, so there is no ambiguity to resolve against alternatives, and an agent can tell this apart from mark_task_done immediately.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: it returns the caller's open tasks, which makes the intent self-evident, but there is no explicit 'use this when' clause, no mention of the alternative (mark_task_done for closing tasks), and no guidance about switching the active mesh first. Adequate but thin.

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