List contact tasks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering safety and potential incompleteness. The description adds little beyond restating the function. It does not disclose pagination, ordering, or response format. The claim of 'all tasks' may conflict with openWorldHint, but not explicitly. No additional behavioral context is provided.

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 with no filler. Efficient and front-loaded with the primary action.

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 simple list tool with one parameter and annotations covering read-only and open-world, the description is minimal but adequate. It does not mention potential pagination or result limits, nor the structure of the returned tasks. Given the openWorldHint, 'all tasks' might be misleading. More detail would improve completeness.

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 schema has one parameter contactId with 0% description coverage. The description says 'attached to a contact' but does not explicitly map contactId to the contact identifier. It vaguely implies the relationship but does not explain the parameter's meaning or format. Given the low coverage, the description should clarify, but it does not.

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 action (List), the resource (tasks), and the scope (attached to a contact). It distinguishes from siblings like ghl_get_contact_task (single task) and ghl_create_contact_task (creation).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of sibling tools like ghl_get_contact_task for retrieving a specific task or ghl_create_contact_task for adding tasks. The description only states the function without any usage context.

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