list_active_tasks

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), but the description adds non-obvious behavior: the short vCenter recent-task retention window, ordering (running/queued first, then newest), and the consequence that limit silently drops the oldest rows. It also describes the return envelope and the truncated flag, none of which the annotations convey.

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?

Front-loads the [READ] tag and the core question, then layers in ordering, envelope, and retention details efficiently. Slightly redundant in restating read-only ('[READ]' plus 'Read-only') already covered by annotations, but no sentence is wasted overall.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by describing the return envelope and per-row fields, plus truncation and retention caveats. Nothing an agent needs to call or interpret this correctly is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description still adds meaning by explaining that ordering makes limit drop the oldest records and that include_recent pulls in just-completed/failed tasks, which the terse schema labels do not convey.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (list in-flight vCenter tasks) and frames the question it answers ('why is the cluster busy?'). It explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings get_host_performance and list_active_sessions, so an agent can select it without opening the schema.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use ('Use this before blaming load'), the alternative it complements (get_host_performance) and the pairing tool (list_active_sessions) to attribute the task to a user. It also routes the out-of-scope action (cancelling a task) to vmware-aiops.

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