列出远程后台任务

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and non-destructive behavior. The description adds minimal context by mentioning 'status summary,' but it doesn't disclose additional behavioral aspects such as authentication requirements or result ordering. With annotations covering safety, a 3 is appropriate.

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 a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action. While under-specified, it avoids unnecessary words and is appropriately brief for a simple listing tool.

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?

Despite having rich annotations and an output schema, the description fails to clarify parameter semantics and does not mention any optional behaviors (e.g., filtering). The tool is relatively simple, but the missing param information makes it incomplete for reliable use.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no explanation of the 'alias' or 'limit' parameters. Agents are left to guess that 'alias' is a server identifier and 'limit' caps the number of returned tasks. This is a significant gap for effective tool invocation.

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 tool lists remote tasks and their status summaries. The verb 'list' and resource 'remote task directory' distinguish it from related commands like ssh_execute or ssh_cancel_job, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from ssh_job_status.

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 on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like ssh_job_status for a specific job. The usage is implied by the name but not explicitly stated, and there are no exclusions or prerequisites mentioned.

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