List Tasks

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does reveal a meaningful behavioral default: non-completed tasks for the most recent active project. Still, it doesn't disclose ordering, how 'active project' is resolved, error behavior, or explicitly confirm the read-only nature beyond the verb 'List.'

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 sentences with the action front-loaded and only one additional behavioral clause. It contains no filler and does not redundantly repeat the schema's per-parameter descriptions.

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 7-parameter listing tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description supplies the key behavioral default while the schema handles filter semantics. It is adequate for selecting and invoking the tool, though it omits details such as sort order and response shape.

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 coverage is 100%, giving the baseline of 3, but the description adds value by explaining the implicit default for project/status that the schema does not encode. That extra context helps an agent understand what happens when project or status filters are omitted.

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 clear verb ('List') and resource ('tasks') and adds a useful default scoping detail. It distinguishes the tool from single-task get_task or mutation tools like create_task, but it doesn't explicitly differentiate it from potentially overlapping siblings like get_next_tasks or search.

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 second sentence gives concrete context: 'Defaults to showing non-completed tasks for the most recent active project.' This tells an agent what to expect when no filters are supplied and hints at when to use it. However, it offers no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or pointers to alternative filter/search tools.

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