nworks_task_list

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses OAuth authentication requirement and scope ('task.read'), which is valuable behavioral context. However, lacks details on return format, pagination behavior (despite cursor param), rate limits, or error scenarios.

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?

Three distinct clauses covering purpose, example usage, and auth requirements. No redundant information. Efficient structure with example queries front-loaded to aid intent recognition.

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?

Reasonably complete for a list operation with well-documented parameters, and auth disclosure is essential. However, with no output schema, no annotations, and pagination capability (cursor param), the description could improve by describing return structure or pagination behavior.

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% (all 5 parameters have descriptions). Description provides no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, but baseline score is 3 when schema coverage is high per evaluation rules.

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?

Description uses specific verb '조회합니다' (query/list) with resource '할 일(TODO) 목록', clearly distinguishing this read operation from sibling mutation tools (nworks_task_create/update/delete). Example queries ('할 일 확인해줘', 'TODO 목록 보여줘') further clarify the tool's scope.

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?

Provides concrete example queries indicating when to use the tool ('할 일 확인해줘', '남은 업무 뭐 있어?'). However, lacks explicit 'when not to use' guidance or explicit naming of alternative tools (e.g., 'use nworks_task_create to add new items').

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